I do think Wonderbar has a lot of Bransford flair to it; a lot of times, the characters would say something, or do something, and I'd laugh to myself and think Isn't that just like Nathan? We often write what we feel into our books because that is the beauty of the craft of writing; it is a living art, words transferring thoughts and feelings from one human heart to the next.

In my 3 WIP's, my life filters through into all of them. Like you, once they go through the lens of Sci-Fi, UF, etc it is barely distinguishable, but it is there for certain. Great blog, sir!

I can definitely relate to that guest post. I started the novel I'm currently querying a couple months before I graduated from college. Naturally, I'd never experienced the fantastical/creepy plot twists I was writing about, but my protagonist was a girl who knew exactly what she loved and wanted to do for the rest of her life - but she wasn't sure if she COULD do those things. Those kinds of worries were weighing heavily on my mind at the time. They still do sometimes.

Last night I was talking to a woman who had this strange quirk when she was speaking and all I could think about was how I would make one of my characters do that too.
Also, my protag is a female newspaper crime reporter like I used to be -- but she's way cooler than I ever was.

I'm not going to admit to any specifics in this kind of format, but I will say that my entire life has heavily influenced everything I write. Obviously.

Are you sure you've never made a corndog trade?

Real life is the breath of writing. I've always been an observer and when I moved overseas I found so much that was new and different; so much to discover and understand. Learning a second language has forced me to listen more, and in doing so I've witnessed countless situations that have touched my heart, made me laugh or cry and taught me that Shakespeare was right when he wrote "all the world's a stage"...and I might add "great material for a writer".

I think that as writers, what we write is influenced by our daily experiences and our personal viewpoints, whether we realize it or not. Even for people who write with the end goal of realism, it's not what actually is real that ends up on the pages, it's the writer's perception of reality. The trick is, then, as we edit, to identify what we have subconsciously included in our draft, and to pinpoint which things help the story and which things don't.

You write what you know. If you want to write something you haven't learned yet, you better get crackin'! Homework is very important if you want to make it in this business.

I am but the sum of my experiences, which all coalesce into the characters and stories I write.

WORD VERIFICATION: Herth. An object in the possession of a female, to someone with a lisp.

I'm a people watcher. I can be in a crowd anywhere and come up with five interesting characters.

Always keep a notebook handy.

I believe that while life inherently sneaks into my writing, I don't think that writers should mirror their lives exactly. What's the fun in that, anyway? I know the whole saying, "Write what you know" but if all you know is what you experience, that's where imagination comes in, no?

So I think real life should healthily inspire writing, but I don't think it should command it. I've seen a lot of young writers try to mirror their own lives in their writing, sort of like self-insertion fics. And.... I don't know... they make me slightly uncomfortable. Perhaps I'm just biased?

I did not enjoy my "school" yrs. From 1st grade through 12th I went to 5 different schools. Never becoming too attached to anyone.

In my current YA ms I've created those school yrs as I would have preferred them to be.

Also my protagonist starts out timid and shy and I am nothing near that so it's hard not to let my strong personality seep through. But by then end, with everything she goes through, I'll be able to flow right through.

Any good story in my opinion is good only if it does incorporate the author's emotions. SciFi is not my favorite genre, but in the hands of an Orson Scott Card I'm spellbound--precisely because of the emotional undercurrents. Certainly in memoir "real life" and its attendant emotions are paramount. Memoir is the only thing that at age 71 I now write. I connect with my readers on that emotional level that's so important even in, as you say, children's literature. From the comments here, it seems that you've succeeded in writing a story that's filled with human feelings. Wonderbar is on my TBR list!!
Ann Best, Author of In the Mirror, A Memoir

Well, for me it's not so much anything tangible that inspires my writing. I'm fairly young by just about anyone's standards and so lacking in experience have to rely purely on research and imagination for most of what I write about. But the emotions and thought processes the characters run through are inspired by my own, if that makes any sense. :)

I may not have the experiences that my characters have (never have or would base jump off the Eiffel tower, for example) but I try to think of times when I experience emotions that are similar, and try to write those with as much authenticity, and emotion, as I can. The weird thing is, I find my writing tells me things that I need to know about my own life, like a theme of being unhappy in a job, or trying to choose between creativity and stability. :)

Where I am physically has a lot to do with the way I feel at any given point. I can be very sentimental about certain places I've been, and when I'm writing, I imagine my characters in those places, and watch the story unfold in my head.

I just posted about this today. I live a boring life, but you can put in tidbits from your life and your ancestor's lives into your stories. Use quirks, physical traits, unusual names and mannerisms to make your stories interesting.

Ugh. I put in a typo and had to delete.
Here it is again:


I don't think anyone can complete dissolve the connections between herself/himself and the writing. It may be very filtered or very obvious, but it's going to be there.
I once heard Eoin Colfer touch on this topic for a bit at the Edinburgh Book Festival a few years ago. He eagerly admitted that he puts all kinds of people in as characters in his books. He named off two goblins who were actually his brothers, and, as most of us had just seen and heard author Ian Rankin interview the then prime minister, Gordon Brown, Colfer declared he planned to work those two into his next book.
This is probably the most dramatic example I can think of, but authors cannot help but put something of themselves, their lives, and their opinions into their works. JRR Tolkien was a devout Catholic. Can we see it in LOTR? Oh, indeed. Whole books have been written about the Christian themes in his book. Bram Stoker was intrigued by technology -- and Dracula is filled with cutting edge stuff of the day (typewriters, stenography, wax recording cylinders). Shannon Hale is a Mormon who's big on marriage and babies. Guess what? Her books hit home on girls getting married and having babies time after time. Robert L. Stevenson admittedly based Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde on the infamous Deacon Brodie and the dual nature and image of the city in which he was born.
Obvious or obscure, ties to the author's life are going to be there. My guess is that any author who thinks s/he's not doing this is merely not doing it consciously.

Real life for example, is me sitting here curled on a comfy hospital chair, having a chemotherapy infusion. Conversation and life stories eddy around me, and I write, poetry and prose.
Lately though, I have begun to wonder if I will ever be able to write fiction. My writing has become defined by my autobiographical voice... and the brevity of moments and meetings.
Do you think it is possible to start writing fiction after years of writing memoirs???

I keep track of odd scenes that I see out and about, then try and find a way to use them where they can be fit into a story.

It's impossible not to think there's a story behind a long-haired Hell's angel with a tiny little girl in a pink dress and furry animal backpack on the back of his bike, wearing his helmet.

Likewise, not using the scene I saw at DisneyWorld with a group of Catholic nuns riding rides with a group of Buddhist monks would be practically criminal.

I agree that it's important to be out in the world, engaging with all kinds of people, refusing to make safe and lazy assumptions.

I'm an introvert, but I do a lot of volunteering, and try to take an active sympathetic interest in everything and everyone around me.

I also have children, and a lot of very long term relationships (friends for 30 years, marriage). I think living through such relationships, making them work well for so long, seeing how those well-known people go through their own lives, is a vital source of insight. You learn so much that you can't infer if you just see them casually, or if you lose track of them after a couple of years. I think that may be why a lot of the greatest novels were written by people over 40.

The other day, my card got declined in Panera. Someone had jacked my account, so the bank shut it down. After praying to die for five minutes, I got my food and sat down to write a scene in which a woman gets declined at a restaurant. The red cheek shame was fresh, and it rolled out onto the page. Thanks, guy who stole my card number!

The disclaimer I make for my fiction goes like this - "Everything I am writing about is absolutely true. I just can't promise you that any of it ever happened."

So the events might not always be real life inspired but they are real to the writer inspired. Even if you think your 'real' life doesn't show up in your writing, you're probably fooling yourself. You are all there, baby, naked in
a thousand different ways.

I was all set to write about my real life adventures on a great expedition on an ocean liner to a fabulous lost city and our battles with sea monsters and Fascist U-boats and airships and aliens along the way. But then that J. T. Shea guy stole my life!

At least we don't have to sharpen our quills anymore. Great photo again, Nathan.

The post by Daniel José Older was very engaging, since he comes at the process of writing with a passion for life itself. (and he shows it by the extra things he does in his off time)

My writing comes from my observations which usually twig my brain into extrapolating possibilities. I posted on my blog a while back about observing what's going on around you.

http://dghudson-rainwriting.blogspot.com/2010/11/curiosity-as-research-or-just-plain.html

Two of my novel WIPs were started based on what I had seen or read about. I get short story ideas based on things that happen to me, or what I've read about in the news that evokes a strong feeling.

Maybe writers channel life through our veins better, since we're attuned to the vibrations.

I think writers use their real life experiences as a resource in their writing. I know I sure do. We've all heard the saying: Truth is stranger than fiction. And often it is.

Real life seeps into every part of my writing - plots, settings, and especially characters. I don't "copy" people from real life into my books, but I love pulling personality traits from people I know and inserting them into my characters.

I turned into a ladybug once, but I got better.

I agree that we write from real life but more so from our own world view. We all have one: life is a bitch, life is a joy, life is one long laugh, life is awesome, life is a fast paced ride, life is painful.
That personal world view has to show up in your characters because you're creating them, thereby giving them (subconsciously)little bits of your personality...even if you are creating them to be vastly different, or evil. : )

I work in mental health and deal a lot with the emotions of others, but I can't deny that those ups and downs, tragedies, feelings of despair and hopelessness as well as victories, breakthroughs, and moments of growth don't affect me. The best and worst part of being me is my sensitivity to others. I hope that this characteristic helps me be a better writer. Not only in being able to flesh out characters but also inserting the universal truths that show up in books and speak to us. Yes, I know that truth. Yes, I know that feeling. Yes, I've been there. Yes, that is me--the lonely, the forgotten, the lost, the ashamed, the hurt, the hopeful, the loving, the strong, the brave, the human.

Real life inspires me to escape into make-believe. Hehe.

And, more on topic, if I couldn't draw from my own experience, I'd have a hard time breathing life into characters at all. They might seem like sociopaths--acting out the superficial affects of emotion rather than acting as a result of feeling real emotion.

I'm not sure about other writers; sure looks like this bunch agrees with me, though, when I say that reality is the big ocean where my inspiration is spawned. Real-life desires, experience, frustrations (you name it), fertilized by imagination and wishful thinking, and brought to life by skill and craft (and unique voice).

I put in so much stuff from real life that the finished work could serve partly as a journal.

Sometimes when I'm stuck, I'll write the song currently playing wherever I am, into the story. It keeps the pen moving!

The emotional side really transfers into my stories. If I am feeling overwhelmed I find a character to feel over whelmed by different kinds of things. If I feel sad I create a sadness in my character. I can also admit that some of the things I have experienced in my life I have suggested my characters experience them as well in either a lighter or darker way.

Like your friend, I also work in healthcare. There is a lot I see and do that can be really emotional but showing emotion at that time isn't appropriate. For example, the phrase 'pull the plug' is something everyone has heard, but it's my job to be the one to actually, *pull* the plug. (actually, we remove the endotracheal tube, or disconnect the ventilator). Often family is gathered around the bed as I go into the room. Talk about feeling like the Grim Reaper. I'm always wondering what they are thinking and feeling, and try to capture some of that emotion and infuse my characters with it.

I hear all the time that we should draw from our own experiences to write. I write Fantasy. When I write I try to bring accross to my readers the goodness in men's hearts, that basic spark we all possess that gives us the ability to change the world, to defy evil, to wonder what we could be if we only tried. Does that make sense? I hope so, would hate to just be rambling.

Some of my real-life feelings and frustrations come through in my writing in my characters, but as you said, by that time there are so many filters and layers that it is (I hope) not so transparent. It doesn't matter if my novel is set 1000 years in the future on a different continent, some human emotions and experiences are universal, and being able to convey those emotions makes the story richer and more believable. My frustrations with the graduate school system and some past experiences with rejection showed up in my main character in my last manuscript, for example, even though otherwise we are not very similar.

For my YA novel When I Am Singing to You I drew on my experience of working in the cornfields of Iowa for 5-6 years to make money for school expenses.

I know what it's like to travel to a field at dawn in a cattle truck with no windows, then go up and down the stifling rows of corn, sizzling with tangy chemicals, to detassel it. Covered in sweat, eaten up by bugs, bored to death. The edges of the corn leaves slapping my bare legs and arms and sometimes slashing my eyeballs.

I also know what it's like to husk baby corn and slice deep into the ball of my thumb the first hour I arrive at work, outside a food processing plant that smells like (no good way to put this, sorry) puke. And I know what it's like to be sprayed by a crop dusting plane--twice--and have a headache so bad it feels like someone took an axe to my skull. Etc.

This experience cried out for me to use it in a novel. And having such a distinct memory of these setting details helped motivate me to write such a story in the first place. I don't believe there are many stories that depict this grueling work or the people who do it (now mostly Mexican Americans, even in Iowa; when I did it was mostly kids from small towns or working class neighborhoods like my own). And yet there are many people who live this story.

What you see and absorb in 'real life' becomes part of your writer's tool box. In most cases the experiences whirl thorough the vortex of my imagination and come out looking quite different.

The language, walk, food, smell, glare of a correctional facility and the stories within its wall inspire me and allow me to play both sides of the fence (or wall).

We all write from our own experiences. We write about people we know, either by design or accident. We include characteristics we admit or hate, but we base those upon having seen them close up. We write about emotions, but only as we feel them...or as we perceive them in others. There are a million ways to cry, but we include those we have seen in real life. We can mentally create bodies, but we populate them with our own reality.

Interesting questions and comments.

For me, since I primarily write non-fiction and memoir, my work is definitely a reflection of my experiences. But even in my small fiction pieces, I can see who I am behind the words.

Actually, that's one thing about eventually being published that sort of scares me. It's so vulnerable! Anyone could take a magnifying glass to what I write and know so much about me. I don't know if other authors feel this way - that their writing exposes who they are - but it's something that I'm nervous about...

Won't stop me from publishing, but especially when I think about writing my memoir - I wonder how people handle being so vulnerable to unknown readers. Just something I'm thinking about....

Oh, and that was a really good article by Daniel Jose Older.

My life is horrifically dull, so I write things I would never do, and things I would never say. Living vicariously through my characters being mean, obnoxious, silly, ridiculous. It makes me feel good to know even if I can't do it, I can think it!

The answer I abuse most often when asked 'why do you write?' is 'writing is cheaper than therapy'.
My characters feel what I feel, they know what I know, they experience what I have. That's why I've always thought of writing as laying your soul bare for the world to read.

Anyway, I love BP's comment and agree with it 100%.

Writing what you feel during your life's experiences may be a better way of explaining "write what you know." Real life is what my trilogy is based on...my mother's real life. She grew up in the 30s and danced in a chorus line til she met my father and fell in love. My story is somewhat different in plot but the feelings she had as an orphan, a foster child and then traveling and finally meeting her man, is all incorporated in the story.

In most of my books, I us my memories of the mischievous child I was, and the mischievous adult I have become, but I also add my experiences with animals and turn them into fictitious children's books. Though one of my books was total fantasy.

My online comic strip http://chalkandcheesecomics.blogspot.com/ is pretty much based on conversations with my kids (eg who would win in a fight between a Yeti and giant sloth?), and situations we find ourselves in (anyone for ice cream?).I'm forever jotting down snippets of conversation which help add an authentic and unique voice to my characters, and certainly give me a wealth of ideas to run with. Drop by and judge for yourself...

Since I'm a thriller/paranormal writer, what gets my juices flowing are my nightmares! And I have some doozies. I've had them since I was a kid, which used to bother me a lot until I decided to share them with the world. Therefore, I see my writing as a kind of therapy, if you will. :) What a great way to get those buggers out of your system!

I believe characters emotions definitely play a role in real life experiences even if the story is far from anything you have ever experienced. Certainly personalities come from yourself, family members, friends, people you know, or have had experiences with. Whatever the case, we write basically what we know and add a certain twist to the tale. Even the way the rain falls in the South compared to the Northwest, or the the difference in the color of the sky in your area or the sunsets. We write what we feel.

My blog is my real life, so it totally inspires that. My romance novels are somewhat inspired by own emotions and fantasies, but not so much my real life.

One of the speakers at last year's RWA conference said that YA writers write not just for the young readers of today, for the teen they were. Maybe it's just a case of finding my voice, but I'm finding it a lot easier to dig into the emotions in my YA WIP than it ever was in my adult historical. Plus my home town is proving to be a rich background that's so easy to tap!

When I first started writing chick lit, I tried writing stories about young women who went out to bars and parties on a regular basis. But it was hard because my twenties were defined by work; even on the rare occasions when I did go to bars or parties I found myself thinking about all the work I had to do. So the stories I write now are inspired by my work experiences, because I think that real women in their twenties and thirties don't get to hang out with their friends as much as they spend time with their work colleagues.

I write science fiction and fantasy and I know real life has a lot to do with my writing. Without my personal experiences and emotions I couldn't write what I do. Spec Fic isn't just about strange places and peoples (though it is that). It is about the people in these worlds and how they experience the life around them. In the end, all literature is about the human experience. People connect to my characters because they understand their emotions and reactions (whether they always like the choices my characters make or not is a different story altogether).

I especially love taking news stories and weaving science fiction and fantasy stories that are based on them.

Well, since I do write memoir and personal essays, my life very much infiltrates my writing. My most recent essay is about trying to explain death to my three-year-old. I know, though, that if I wrote fiction, my life would influence my writing as well because all the ideas I have for fiction stories stem from events in my life.

My life is my writing.

If an unhappy childhood is a writer's gold mine, then my absurdly blissful adult life is my diamond mine.

I am finding more and more that I am letting what I am going through slip into my writing. But i never recreate things exactly; I take layers from people I know, and paste them onto characters, sometimes getting aspects for three or four characters off the one person. I also weave in elements of my life, emotions and small anecdotes, lines of dialogue etc. But I deliberately just use this as a starting block, firstly as real life people and events are so impossible to know completely, and I need to know thoroughly what's happening when I am writing, and secondly so in years time I do not have any embarrassing incidents if i ever run into someone who has identified themselves in my novel.

My life experiences have inspired me to write, dictating the genre of my work. Losing my first son at the ripe age of 22, emotionally distraught, drove me to write my first book, BELIEVE- a story about the loss of a child… a heart’s healing journey… and the bond of a Mother’s love. My upcoming memoir/narrative nonfiction (title TBA)centers on my second son’s traumatic brain injury, set against the backdrop of his insurmountable challenges, inspired by a mother’s unwavering faith, impacted by the intercession of heavenly beings, yet gripped by an unexpected twist of fate. Guess you would say, "Real life has inspired my writing."

Art doesn't just imitate life, it is often life embodied, personified. We cannot create life (art) from a vacuum. Its genesis is in our souls, our imagination, our experiences. The art and craft of telling the stories of life (a fictional life, or a memoir)that resonate with others is directly correlative with the distillation of talent, experience, imagination, craft, timing, and soul we possess. If we do not experience life--engage in it--we rely too heavily, then, on imagination. Although imagination is the germination of story, experience is the backbone.

In the creation of my children's books, An Adventure with Joshua and Hoppy Frog was born. I was inspired by the birth of my grandson. Joshua's delivery was negligent and caused life-threatening disabilities. At that time, we were told that Joshua wouldn't be a normal little boy. So, as new grandmother I wrote my book as if Joshua was discovering life and adventures that most little boys would do. Along the way he met Hoppy the Frog his best friend. Together they learn about self-worth. The inspiration has also created An Adventure with Joshua and Rocky the Otter and they learn courage. Write from your heart.

I think it goes the other way, too. The other night I wrote a scene from the antagonist's POV. It's a scene near the end of the book where everything is unraveling for him, and he was wildly angry. About this time, my 4yo daughter woke up and asked for something. It was all I could do, to stay calm and help her (even though I'm not an angry person). Does anyone else have this happen? The emotions of your story spill over into real life?

Real life events guide some of the drama in the lives of my characters.

This is great news — I just figured everyone was out to get me.

You forgot:

c) The writing mafia, headed by the triumvirate of King/Meyer/Rowling, is terrified my manuscript will thwart their plans to ‘dumb-down’ literature so they, and only they, will be the only people to ever be published ever again. To this end they have sent out strict instructions to their Evil Gatekeepers (Agents) minions to reject my MS upon sight!

……….wha? is it time for my medication already?

I'm still working on getting my manuscript where I want it, so I haven't gotten to queries yet, but when I do, I plan to comb through every piece of advice you've ever given about them (on this here fine blog).

And I would never ever EVER email you personally for advice. Don't people know you have a job? And a life? Well, they should.

Most are receiving rejections because it's a subjective business. It always has been and always will be.

Some, granted, don't know how to write a query from a thank you note. But the majority are being rejected because it's subjective and they just have to keep exhausting every single possibility there is out there now that's available to authors.

Hillsy. I seriously vote for C as that's the truth.

You mean after all the time you spend helping us with advice on the blog, running the forums, and everything else, you don't have time to help perfect every query that hits your inbox?

I thought you were an Android.

This is a very timely post for me, thank you!

I've done my first batch of queries and it's time to attack that query letter (of which I was inordinately proud) and also revise the manuscript (ditto ridiculously proud) to up the word count a bit.

I agree that rejections are subjective, but I also believe that if you can show your story arc clearly and succinctly, you're head and shoulders above the crowd. I use a "template" of

1) opening paragraph with targeted detail saying why the agent was chosen (I google "agent+interview" to find something to reference)
2) mini-synopsis that has: who the protagonist is, what he/she needs to do (what reader is rooting for) and why that's important
3) closing with personal details as to why the author is qualified to write this book.

Then the professional "can provide full" stuff. Never more than a page.

My first agent told me she'd signed me because "not many authors can show their story arc in a synopsis" and after reading a lot of queries & synopsis for my critique service, I see that. It's hard to disengage from the details we love, and just get down to the spine of the story, and the hook.

Gotta check out the forums. I love this stuff. (Sick, I know.)

Nathan--
Is it all right to send revised queries to people you've already sent queries to? I read query critiques, and sometimes I hardly recognize the revised versions...and I'm just reading a few once or twice a week. If your query was forgettable, is it all right to send again?

Wow. I'm no where near that point of the publication process, and suddenly I'm not as excited to get there. That sounds frightening.

I don't handle rejection well (honestly, does anyone?), but I guess, when I get to that point, I'll have to suck it up and deal with it. I will definitely be coming back to this blog for tips at that point of the process, so thank you so much for providing them!

Have a wonderful day, and happy writing!

Good basic advice, Nathan.

Rejections can be daunting or not, depending on our own attitude. If we use it constructively, it benefits us.

Query letter writing has been elevated almost to the status of the book itself. Why is that? Is it due to the influx of writers, clogging the market? It's the first rung up if you succeed, if not, back to the unpublished mud with you.

BTW - love the photo.

Whirlochre, how can they be out to get you when they're really out to get me? Let's split them. Half (3 billion people) out to get you, and the other 3 billion out to get me.

Hillsy, you too!? Okay, let's make it 2 billion vs Whirlochre, 2 billion vs me, and 2 billion vs you. You can have Stephen King, Whirlochre can have J. K. Rowling, and I'll take Stephanie Meyer.

But really, I don't get rejections. For a very simple reason...

My query got eight form responses out of twelve and only one request for a full-- but that was from an agent I met at a conference.

I am a writer and I cannot write a query letter. Pathetic.

When I first started querying I was excited just to form rejections because I finally felt in the game. Of course after several more, I wanted to throw in the towel. I know there is a lot of pressure on the query letter itself but I'd have to assume that even if the letter isn't perfect an agent would still request material based on the story being pitched. How many rejections constitute another look at the query letter?

Thanks, Nathan! This was like a mini perspective cleaning. =D

Hmmm.... it seems to me that there's also that c) there are so many people submitting mss these days that the law of supply and demand allows agents to pick and choose very, very carefully only those things which they think will be top sellers, skipping over those mss which may even be better but will not be as marketable.
But, then again, I'm only an English teacher, so I can only guess at these things.

(I do like Hillsy's explanation though.)

when i sent my manuscript to a wonderful historical fiction author who had offered to help (and then was extraordinarily kind enough to eventually put her blurb on my novel) she also asked to see my query letter.

she said wonderful things about the novel and DESTROYED my query letter. it was apparently awful--self deprecating, nervous, tentative, washed out awful. she took the time to wreck it with the most brilliantly constructive comments possible and i am so grateful!

You forgot to throw in the non-responders.

Ten queries sent, 4 requests, 2 passes and four dead silences. Those suck more than the rejections.

Some agencies allow you to query different agents at the same agency (not simultaneiously) but how are you supposed to know when it's no longer simultaneous if the first agent you query never responds?

Just as I'm beginning to feel disheartened, along comes Nathan with words of hope! I've received several requests for excerpts and/or a synopsis, so maybe it's not the query letter.

I did get feedback from one agent that it seemed too "episodic." OK. I could work with that if I knew what he meant. Of course, I know the definition, but how does it apply to my story/writing? Aren't most works of fiction "episodic" to some extent? I really appreciated that he cared to offer feedback at all - just still not sure what I need to do to correct it. So, tell me, when you were an agent (it wasn't you, by the way), if you felt the writing was too episodic, pray what would you be trying to tell me?

Thanks. I'm glad I found your site. Now that I'm getting dangerously close to the querying stage, it will come in handy.

That's good advice, but it's important to keep in mind that you may get a rejection for reasons other than your letter or manuscript. Maybe the agent isn't accepting new cilents, maybe the agent's assistant who scans all the queries didn't like the concept of the story. Maybe you sent it to the wrong person in the office. There are lots of reasons. The only remedy is to keep at it.

When I was younger........ I could find myself dreaming of writing books. But now, maybe I`m too lazy for the work I think it take to write and correct all these pages...

I was getting nothing but form rejections, until I decided to put a little literary oomph into the query. Then I got a reply saying that the attached 10 pages weren't as good as she was expecting, which told me that the query letter worked, but not the beginning of the manuscript.

I had to come to terms that the beginning chapter of the book, which I was very attached to, was not very strong. I recently bit the bullet and re-wrote the first chapter, with my more improved writing skill, and am ready to head back into the trenches (as soon as I write a synopsis :P)

Unfortunately, there are other reasons why manuscripts are being rejected. Most agents are looking for books that will bring in mega sales and are rejecting some amazing books, including Paul Harding's TINKERS which went on to win a Pulitzer Prize as an indie-published novel and THE SILENCE OF MEDAIR which went on to become a Finalist in the Aurealis Awards after being self-published. Here's a rather illuminating blog post by Kristine Kathryn Rusch who's won numerous major awards, is the only person to ever receive a Hugo Award for fiction and a Hugo Award for editing, and had books on best-selling lists all over the world: The Business Rusch: You Are Not Alone. And here’s Kristine Kathryn Rusch’s Bio. In today’s market, no matter how perfect their query letter and how excellent their book, many of the best books will never be requested by agents. That’s another, darker side to the story about today’s market. It’s also why some of the best writers are turning to self-publishing.

You could also try the cheaters method and just get lucky. It's nice to get lucky.

I'm not much into the query, but what I appreciated about this article was that it brought out the importance of the MS. I think alot of times people can get focused on writing the perfect query, when the thing that really needs attention is the basic writing.

It's so hard for writers to know when that's the issue!! I think if I had several rejections (actually I'd do this before I sent it out) I'd look for professional feedback on my work someway or another. New eyes and a fresh perspective.

Good luck to everyone who is querying!

Thanks. Good to know.

Great post Nathan, this kind of regular advice and honesty is helpful for aspiring authors! : )

I agree with Marilyn - you left off:

c) Your query is fine, your book is excellent, but the agent for one reason or another doesn't notice the fact, or mistakenly thinks it won't sell.

It's not always the author at fault. There is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that agents don't always get it right.

After forty form rejections by major fantasy agents, I managed to get a hold of some editors and find out why no one was interested in my project. Turned out my novel premise is just too weird to be considered marketable in mainstream publishing. Sometimes there's nothing wrong with what you're doing -- it's just that you're not pitching it to the right people.

Interesting response from Marilyn Peake. I can understand why she says this. I paid for an agent's critique of my pages at a conference, and submitted a manuscript that everyone - my crit groups, my individual CPs, everyone - had loved. The agent's feedback was that it was good, but that it was too quiet to be marketable. I'm still deciding what to do about that - revise again, or submit to houses that are known for quiet stuff - but there is, with agents, an element of "how mass-marketable is this, anyway?" In a sense, because so many houses are closed to unagented submissions, this is discouraging.

Mira makes an interesting point about getting professional feedback, but a professional crit of an entire novel can be very expensive. However, if you have the writing chops to take feedback on your first few chapters and then apply it to the manuscript in its entirety, then I think it can be worth doing.

Lexi. Yep. That's a good point for C and unfortunately it's pretty common. Basically as the agents said, my work is not marketable at all and / or no one would be interested in it. Strange, but for a novel which will be released in November it already has few hundred fans and followers and after a simple preview I got these feedbacks; "a great idea developed into a highly marketable product." or "Not usually greatly into fantasy genre, BUT I reckon I could enjoy this one.", ". So your point C definitely stands. And the best is, officially not I'm the professional, not I'm the marketing genius... yet it seems not I'm the one who was dead wrong, but those few dozens of agents who rejected it without even reading my work (As most of them actually never read it, just rejected it.).

Istvan, I suspect in the UK some agents are rejecting without even a cursory glance at the first paragraph, so overwhelmed are they by their slush piles. And most successful indies sought mainstream publication before going it alone.

So no one should accept their work is not good enough SIMPLY because they cannot interest an agent (though of course there’s always the possibility the book is unreadable). If I’d had faith in the responses of agents to my books, they’d still be unread and I’d be a lot poorer.

Good luck with your novel :o)

Lexi. I believe the same goes in the U.S. When I read that some agents are making a "race" about query reading and they're telling... "Imagine. I finished 300 queries today.". Well, that's already sounds weird. How many of those queries were actually read? And how many were rejected just to have a chance to blog that day; "I finished 300 queries today.".

Many used to ask, why traditional publishing is dying? Well, this is one of the reasons.

Thanks for writing on this subject. Every rejection feels like some one just laughed at my baby's picture.
Sometimes it's hard to find a theme as
most rejections I've received have been vague and boiler plate. After 12 rejections, some after partials and one full request, I asked one particularly friendly agent for a little more specific info, which was helpful. Now I have to look at my manuscript again and decide if I should just keep moving or attack my "final" edit one more time.

Istvan.

I personally would've said that if agents have enough queries that they can afford to just skim over 300 queries per day, then that puts traditional publishing in rather rude health.

It's like saying "Do you know why my resteraunt is struggling so much? Its because I've got capacity for 200 diners and every night 500 people turn up to eat."

The idea that agents are just disregarding their query pile and skimming over everything is much more myth than reality. But if an agent IS skimming over their query pile it's because they have enough clients already, not because they're rude terrible horrible people.

"Do you know why my resteraunt is struggling so much? Its because I've got capacity for 200 diners and every night 500 people turn up to eat."

If you have the capacity for 200, you won't invite 500 for a party. Only if you're stupid or greedy. Agents has the capacity of 50 or 100 per day, yet they're accepting much more, because "We're soooooo professional and the "we're receiving many queries" on our blog looks so good and make us real professionals in the eyes of our fans.". And this is a joke as they're not reading the half of the mentioned quantity. If they don't have the capacity, they should simply stop asking queries for a month or two. But nope. They rather ask for more, because that shines our endless ego. And because of this, they're doing a damned lame job in most cases (There are only few exceptions.). They should learn that quantity is not equal with quality. And in a job where quantity is existing and taking the lead, that's never going to be quality job anymore.

Istvan-

So.. agents should cap the number of queries they receive? You would find that satisfactory?

How do they implement that? How do they do it fairly?

Next up: people complain about agents capping queries.

Nathan. If they're capping queries, that would be much more acceptable. What agents forgot is the simple basic business etiquette. As a writer I don't care about what problems do they have or how many queries they're accepting, until they're saying "Our business is open! Now, we accept thousand billion queries." . If they can't read that much, then don't request that much. But as they're accepting hundreds of queries, the basic business etiquette demands a fair review for every single one of them, instead of the "I skim this one, because other fool is going to send me more.". Agents simply lost their credibility.

Istvan-

How should they implement that, fairly and easily?

Hmmm. If I should do this, I would accept queries for two or three weeks, or I would set a limit of X hundred queries then when it's reaching the number, I would close the session. Then I would review the received queries for one or two weeks. Then another query session would come, then another review session. And so on and so on. Maybe an agent wouldn't get that much query as before, but maybe they wouldn't pass good manuscripts too. As I read some agent blogs, some agent is believing if they're accepting hundreds of thousands or few qatrillion queries, they'll look so professional. But in the reality if they can't read that much, they shouldn't accept that much. Writers are not idiots. They also consider agents as human beings and they used to accept if an agent is not willing to accept queries for a week or two, or for a month or two.

Agent! Shhhhmagent! We don't need no stinkin' agents!

Thanks, Nathan.

I'd just like to second your love of Calvin & Hobbes. For me, it doesn't get any better than a good transmogrifier storyline (although I suspect Spaceman Spiff might top your list).

All these agents embracing self-publishing now reminds me of the Alan Jackson song, "She's Gone Country."

(lol)

Let's try this again.

Did you see this article, Nathan? I thought it was amazing how quickly he jumped to number one. Really shows the power of social networking. And Nerdfighters.

Sidekick-

Pretty amazing!

Thanks for the links, Nathan.

Today is our Canada Day,
July 1st! We Canadians will celebrate that in various ways, and wish all the USA readers a Happy July 4th on Monday.

(Meanwhile, the young British Royals, William and Kate are trekking across Canada).

Animaniacs were more for adults than kids, methinks. Some of their comments were priceless.

PS - Jakob Wonderbar is difficult to get (from a bookstore) in western Canada, it has to be ordered. I finally went to an indie store to order it, Nathan, since I believe in supporting the indie stores, rather than Amazon.

But really, I'm even having to advise my library to order it, why hasn't more info gone out the librarians in Canada? Seems like an opportunity and a market missed to me. I'll do my own review on my blog, after I get the book.

Have a great long weekend!

I'm confused about agents getting involved with self-publishing. Why would an author who chooses to self-publish need an agent? I can see that author hiring an editor or a publicist, but an agent? Why?
Someone with more knowledge than I please elucidate.

Oh, and Sidekick, I agree that that is incredible.

Thanks for the shout-out, Nathan!

Side-kick--what a story! I've just Tweeted and FB'd it. (Although John Green does say FB is his least favorite social medium.)

English Teacher--Most of us would like to have agents because they know more than us. And it's a whole lot easier to negotiate treacherous business waters with somebody on your side. Even Konrath has an agent.

Love the updates! I especially loved Natalie Whipple's blog post. Thanks for the share. :D
Have a happy Fourth! Independence, FTW!

Sidekick--I'm a nerdfighter who pre-ordered that book! It helped that John promised personal autographs for every single pre-order. Hehe. His writing hand is gonna be poooooped. XD

Congratulations on all the interviews you’ve had for JACOB WONDERBAR!

I’ve been following the articles on self-publishing you mentioned, have joined in the discussion on most of those sites, and am delighted to find you discussing them here. I’m excited about the new world of self-publishing, very different from what it was a couple of years ago. I started experimenting with self-publishing in March, offering three novels and three short stories for 99 cents each on Kindle. My sales have doubled within two months time and are on par with numbers I’ve heard are good on self-publishing sites. I have an open invitation from a top Hollywood movie agent who only takes on clients by referral to submit all my work to him, my short stories published by an indie publisher are being considered for TV shows in a joint project between my indie publisher and a new media company run by the Executive Producer of THE LORD OF THE RINGS movies. I’m a few months away from completing my final rewrite of a science fiction novel, and I’m suddenly thinking about self-publishing it rather than querying agents. I talked to a web designer about an idea I have for promoting the novel, and am excited about the possibilities for a unique PR campaign. I love innovation. I love new eras of thinking outside the box. Truly great discussions about the new era of publishing here on your blog and on the sites you mentioned.

Nathan, I hope your Cosmic Horizons class didn't require any papers! I can't imagine. It sounds fascinating, but I had a difficult enough time with a paper on the Categorical Imperative in Philosophy.

Calvin and Hobbes and Animaniacs in one post? This is awesome like my childhood.

I'm so thankful for Natalie Whipple's post. I think a lot of us have felt that way and been in similar situations before, even if we're not published yet, or we will experience this in the future. In any case, we can read this, know we're not alone, and try to be better in the future.

Anne, thanks for answering. So, mostly for moral support, then? Okay. I can handle that.

I more like what "anonymous" right after Cathy Yardley said, alluding to wasted time and effort in not knowing.

Wow, very good links this week, Nathan. It may be quiet in the summertime, but the quality is great.

I'd actually love to take on some of these topics during the week, especially Natalie's blog post, if that interests you. It'd be great to discuss some of these more fully.

So, Natalie's post was vulnerable and honest, and I was very moved reading it. I think she hit on a very real and complicated problem about honesty on internet. Really appreciate her for talking about it! Having the internet mob turn on you - very scary. Look at what happened to a poor 13 year old child who just posted a (weak lyriced but quite catchy pop) song. How many people could write music that catchy? Yet, she may be frozen and scarred for life. Awful.

On the other hand, writers, in particular, have a responsiblity to not allow themselves to be silenced. They must speak truth. That is their duty, their burden, their goal, their reason for existence. I truly believe that with all my heart. Thus, the struggle.

Guess I talked about Natalie's post anyway. :)

Anne's blog post was terrific. I was really impressed with all the details and research. Very useful!

Liked reading the other articles about the evolving role of the agent. Should be very interesting seeing how this all works out.

Great comment of the week. Very fun interviews of you, Nathan. :) Fun to be learning more bout you! Sorry your brain got broken in your physics class. Mine would too. There are three things my brain just won't process: physics, real estate and the stock market.

And spelling. Can't forget spelling.

Hope everyone has a great weekend! Happy Independence Day if you're American, Happy Canada Day if you're Canadian, and....um happy weekend to everyone else! Thanks so much for the links, Nathan.

Sorry for the re-post, Nathan. I'm done after this.

I do want to say one more thing about internet honesty.

There is a very key difference between me and Rebecca Black. I'm not 13. I'm an adult.

In the face of danger, do I really hide? Or do I gather my courage and act with integrity? With care, tact and kindness, do I still speak truth?

I often see you doing that, Nathan. That's the road I'd like to take.

@v.n.rieker: Ditto, kiddo. I'm so stoked for his new book. Did you watch the live feed of John reading the first chapter? Just plain awesome.

Ooh - good forum links, Nathan! I haven't been able to stop by the Bransforums in a while, but I should make an effort now that it's summer and all my TV shows are on hiatus.

And I'm so glad to see that you love Calvin and Hobbes - although, really, there's no excuse not to love Calvin and Hobbes.

Have a great weekend!

Animaniacs are awesome!

Self-published authors frequently have agents not for moral support but to negotiate foreign rights and movie rights deals. These can be quite complex, and it's understandable that a self-published author wouldn't want to try to learn the laws and protcols for publishing in numerous countries when an agent is an old hand at these. Many agencies have a staff member who specializes in foreign rights deals.

Sidekick--thanks a bunch for sharing that link. I found John Green's story fascinating, so I've done some research and posted more about him on my blog.

And Margo--thanks for supporting what I said about the usefulness of agents. People who have years of experience know stuff a newbie doesn't. It's naive to think we can jump in and do everything ourselves and not get taken advantage of. I love the idea of hiring an agent for a flat fee.

Haha Nathan, your comments are out of this world. ;D

Not sure if I know what you mean by that, BP!

As always, spot on critique! Still, in spite of the jarring changes in POVs, the tale was intriguing and it seems to me that moving it to a standard omniscient 3rd person POV would solve all the problems...

Because, bottom line, it's the story that matters, that makes you want to read on. And here one wants to read on...

But looking at it from a reader's point of view, perhaps this is not the kind of YA novel best suited for early teens.

On the other hand, there are all sorts of YA novels out there, including those suited to late teens and yes, why not say it, adults! Like for example, Zafòn's wonderful dark Barcelona semi-paranormal romances (I say "semi" because they are neither fully paranormal nor fully romances...) And in that case, multiple POVs might be okay, provided POV changes don't occur in the middle of paragraphs, as you so rightly point out!

I kind of liked that the details were sparse because the ones that were provided told quite a bit (Lulu's gray hair, the almond-shaped eyes, monkeys in the forest).

I would agree with Nathan about the sentence where Lulu sees her baby for the first time. That was the most jarring part for me, especially considering how strongly the midwife reacted. She's probably seen enough births that an ugly baby wouldn't affect her, so I was expecting something truly dreadful... unless of course, there is some detail about this world that we haven't some to yet.

As Claude Nougat said, it's definitely intriguing scene, and if there was more, I would certainly read on! :]

*sigh* Nathan is a word God. It's so enlightening to read these posts.

I don't have too much to add, but here are some things I noticed that no one else has mentioned yet—

"Her old body struggled to bring her child into the world"—haha, I read the word "old" in the wrong context. I was like…uh…as opposed to her new body?! So, yeah. Maybe a simple change like "her frail old body" would help prevent that sort of confusion?

A lot of the sentences seem to have the same sort of rhythm, at least to me. Perhaps try to vary the length and structure in places?

@Nathan—ha, I liked your comment about "tiny infants" being redundant…that said…I was a HUGE 10 pounder, and I'm pregnant with a baby who they told me will be at least 9 pounds. So…I'm not disagreeing that "tiny infants" can be redundant, but if the baby is especially tiny (as opposed to me being especially large, lol), perhaps it's worth mentioning in a way that makes it feel significant instead of redundant.

@Nathan Translation - I just thought it was funny how you say everything a reader would think but 10 times more intuitive. I guess 60zillion odd-some years in the publishing biz allows you to put your finger on everything that goes wrong, while still being constructive and positive. I LOVE IT

I think it sounds interesting. Reading the description of the baby reminded me of Ayla from Jean Auel's Clan of the Cave Bear. The small dainty nose and large eyes, unlike the tribes round noses and her husbands almond shaped eyes. Although Ayla was found, it just reminded me of it.

Anyway, I get the impression from hearing the monkeys outside that it's day but I kept wondering what light is she looking at her baby? Is day light barely streaming in through a hut window or an opening of some kind? Are there windows? Is she looking at her by fire light? I'd like to know more about the setting.

It sounds interesting though. It makes me want to read more to know, why she has grey hair and she's giving birth. Does she have other children? Is this her first birth? Then I wonder will the whole tribe reject her daughter or will they do the opposite and accept her but always pity her? I'd keep reading.

Ooh love what you're saying about too many shifts in perspective, Nathan, must check how much I do the same thing.

I have to say this is the first page critique I've ever read that has left me desperate to read the next part - what's going on? Why does the baby look different? Intriguing.

Very well done. :-)

Thanks for this. We all learn from it.

I agree with your comments. I definitely found the sentence structure very jarring as they were quite short and could have easily flowed together. Maybe that's an acceptable writing style? For example, "Lulu toiled for hours. Her old body struggled to bring her child to the world." could turn into "Lulu toiled for hours, her old body struggling to bring her child to the world." Also, never forget show not tell! You're telling us her old body struggled but show us she's old instead of telling us, show up how she struggled instead of telling is.

Best of luck to Ruthie!

Thanks for sharing your page, Ruthie. You'll learn lots from Nathan's crit, and from some of the comments.

I agree this seems more like an adult book. Any YA who hasn't been a mother already won't like reading the details about birth. Most men cringe as well. Be sure and identify who you're targeting as your audience.

Sequencing of events is difficult, but has to be mastered. Sometimes I think this problem results when we try to write the book as if it were a movie (since we've all been spoonfed some type of video most of our lives). Sometimes I lapse into that as well.

Keep working on this as it has potential, but maybe not in the way you intended. If you do want it to be YA, you may need to make the necessary changes.

Good luck!

@Scribbling Scarlet - I too was reminded of Jean Auel's description of Ayla being different from those who found her. I wondered if this setting is prehistoric or just historical or even alien?

We need more setting details.

I think the concept was good, but when I began to read, I wasnt sure where I was or what time frame this was in. I think the first paragraph should set the 'bearings' of the reader straight, so that sinking into the plot comes naturally.
Good luck, Ruthie!

Personally I like the line about the baby being ugly, because it was completely unexpected, and it was the main thing that made me want to read more. As in "what would cause that to need to be pointed out? Something interesting must be going on here."

I do agree with Nathan though, that it might work better if it was put a little differently. I got the impression that the ugliness was the opinion of the third person narrator, not the mother, but it's true that isn't quite clear.

If that is actually the mother's opinion, it would be helpful if you could clarify why she thinks that, and what it means for our characters.

Wow Ruthie, I hope you're not too overwhelmed by all this feed back. Kudos to you for putting yourself out there!

I look forward to reading the rest of your story some day!

What Nathan said, especially about needing more context. From the midwife's reaction and a whole paragraph to say "her baby was ugly", I was expecting something extreme. We're told that Lulu admires her husband's almond-shaped eyes, which suggests that such eyes are unusual, since people don't generally "admire" things that are commonplace. The baby's not having the desirable feature might be disappointing, but would not having something that most people don't have anyway make her "ugly"? Similarly, a nose that's smaller than normal, rather than larger, doesn't seem all that shocking, as long as it's not actually missing. Nor does the fact that her hair sticks up.

Actually ... that detail pulled me out of the story. A newborn less than a minute old is going to have plastered-down wet hair, not a fluffy corona. Likewise, the midwife's job is only half done the minute the baby appears, yet this one seems to have disappeared. Maybe I'm too picky, but these details interrupt the story for me.

That said, this opening is compelling, and clearly leaves all of us wanting to know more. Which is, of course, the point.

I'm going to need to know if the baby is "ugly" as in a supernatural creature or as in homely. Also, like the redline comments said, the mother needs to have some foreshadowing as to her relationship with the father--does she know he'll adore the healthy baby or is she more "oh crap this kid is hideous he's going to be mad"?

From BP: "...you say everything a reader would think but 10 times more intuitive".

Boy that is so true. You are so gifted, Nathan. You have an unerring instinct and verbalize the crux of whatever feels off and verbalize it succinctly and clearly. It's so impressive and helpful.

Aside from the POV issue, I especially agreed with what you said about this feeling more adult than YA. I appreciate that alot - it rang true!

I also want to congratulate Ruthie for being chosen and for her courage. I really liked the "hook" in this story. It would have kept me reading to find out what the problem was.

I did want to share my thoughts on one thing - the "tiny" baby phrase. Keeping in mind that I also love adverbs, a part of me liked that phrase. Thinking it over, I think the meaning of that phrase changes depending upon the POV.

In omniscient, I think the adjective is redundant. In third person limited, though, I think it can give the reader an intuitive sense of how the protag is feeling in a very quick way. The protag took the baby and felt how tiny it was is a longer way to say it.

I could be wrong, I just wanted to share my thoughts.

Thanks so much, Nathan, word God. That has a ring to it! :)

Many people have mentioned that the line about the baby being ugly is jarring. This is because in everything that follows, it seems like Lulu is proud and loves her baby anyway, but we don't see much of her thoughts. She notes some of the baby's features, but to me, at least, they don't seem that bad. If this baby is truly homely, I think different descriptions are needed. And if it's a case where Lulu loves her baby anyway, we need to see more of her thought process, something like, "but it didn't matter; she was here and she was hers" and so on. (I do like, though, that judging from the mention of monkeys and some of the physical features, that this doesn't seem like a first world setting.)

I also agree with Nathan that this doesn't seem like a YA opening. My guess is that the baby grows up a bit and becomes the protagonist, and if that's the case, I wonder if the birth scene should be handled differently. Backstory infodumps can be tricky, but perhaps something like, "When (baby) was born, the midwife had recoiled in horror. (Baby's) eyes had been huge and round rather than elegant almonds, her nose had been small instead of wide and round..." and so on.

And if Lulu is the protagonist, I don't think many YA readers want to read about an old woman as their main character. Something to consider.

I do really like the hints of setting we get in this one, though.

There are some evocative descriptions in this page. I can see the action unfolding as I read.

What I have trouble believing is that a woman old enough to have an old body and completely grey hair is still young enough to have a child. Lulu sounds to me like she is in her early 70's. Which is about 30 years past childbearing age. Without a really good explanation of why a 70 year old woman is having a baby, I wouldn't read the rest of the story.

If Lulu is in her 40's, then I suggest finding descriptors which suggest that. Take a good look at women in their 40's, they don't look "old." I got carded for alcohol on my 42nd birthday and I've never been botoxed.

I assuming this is the birth of the MC, and is really set-up/backstory and we'll jump to her more grown soon. If that's the case, then this actually feels more MG than YA or Adult to me, but maybe it's just me!

I thought your comments were right on

It's a tried and true way to begin a novel: birth of the protag. It's an acceptable start for a YA novel, because the birth scene would strain credibility as far as any reader who's been in that situation. I'm assuming the author has neither given birth nor attended one. A YA audience would overlook it.

Firstly, how would the crowd outside know it was the final squeal? Surely the silence would be more telling, or (better still) the newborn's distinctive cry?

It takes a lot to shock a midwife as far as babies are concerned. Ugliness wouldn't cut it- most are relived there's a heartbeat and no obvious deformities. Anyway, newborns often have purplish skin (some even dark blue - and survive), their heads can have odd shapes and their faces can be squashed (all due to being forced through a narrow passage). Their bodies are streaked with blood and vernix, and boys' genitalia look ridiculously disproportionate (not that the latter would apply to your baby, but you get the picture). Newborns aint pretty.

It's healthy for newborns to scream when they take their first gasp (no scream = no breathing) but when screaming their eyes are screwed shut, so I dont see how anybody could tell much about the shape of the baby's eyes within the first few minutes of life.

A problem with pronouns here:
"Her nose was small and dainty. Not like the wide, round nose that she had."

Whose nose was dainty and whose nose was wide? I'm assuming Lulu has the dainty one, but I could be wrong.

I'm relieved that Lulu didn't reject her infant, and I'm wondering how baby's odd appearance will affect her when growing up.

Keep going author, but do some research - borrow a home-birthing DVD and you can see all the gory details!

I really wanted to send a small word to say thanks to you for the fantastic points you are writing on this site. My time-consuming internet lookup has at the end been honored with extremely good ideas to exchange with my pals. I ‘d express that many of us site visitors actually are extremely endowed to exist in a notable community with so many lovely individuals with useful points. I feel really fortunate to have used your webpage and look forward to so many more fun moments reading here. Thanks a lot again for a lot of things.
London Hotels

This post brings up great points. I think this might help me with my own writings. Thank you.

I wish I had known that writing the darn thing was the easy part.

Ditto, Nathan. DITTO

I wish I had known that some people were telling the truth when they said sometimes you just need to quit.

That sharing is as critical as creating.

I wish I had known that other writers were in fact not lying. It can take 7, 10, 15, 20 years to see your book on a shelf. I will also steal your end product/outcome wish (it's very profound and will make me sound much more self actualized when I use it.)

Don't worry. You'll figure it out. And when you do, you'll realize it was all in you, from the beginning. All you needed were the elements on some post its, to give your subconscious something to work with.

I can only be my own audience for so long.

What I should have told myself and what I still tell myself...

Work hard.

I wish I had known that I didn't have to be perfect the first time...that there's lots of opportunity for do-overs. That, in fact, the do-overs (editing) is the part where the story really blossoms.

I also wish that I knew that I could "borrow" from other writers better than me. Not plagiarize...borrow...take their writing and turn it to fit mine. Doing that has been unbelievably fun for me.

That skill comes through practice. You aren't born a good writer, you're driven to become one. But it will not happen unless you work your tail off (and read enough top quality books to build yourself a house).

The best way to learn isn't to read all those books on how to write. It's only in doing that you understand.

And for god's sake, stop trying to please teachers by doing everything proper and literary and write something straight across to a friend.

Er, I wish I'd known this one rule: However long you think a project will take, add 12 months.

I wish I would have known that every story I write ends up coming true. I would've written about Amish lovers instead of zombies. Now I can't even make it to my car. And the cable is out. Again.

I wish I would have taken the time to learn more about publishing.

I wrote my first novel trying on purpose to make it long because I loved long books. I never stopped to think that all those famous writers wrote short(er) books first.

I wish I'd known that the word 'actually' is unnecessary in most sentences!

The fact there was an established Craft for fiction writing. I'd been Honors English in high school and a technical writer for years. What is a plot structure?

I'm having to do major re-writes on 4 novels in a series because there's no real structure.

I am offering a no-cost upgrade to any latest and greatest electronic editions, though.

I wish I had known to find a writing partner and a critique group.

Not that I needed to hear it at the time, but I would go back and say

"Don't you dare give up."

There were times I wanted to. I never did, thankfully. I was passionate enough about writing that I withstood the scrutiny and doubt.

I probably also would tell myself

"Don't write that epic fantasy right now. You're not ready."

That is still true. The epic fantasy I began at age 14 is still too large a project. Someday, I'll go back to it. And when I do, it will be glorious.

I wish I'd understood earlier about the sheer amount of writing that every single writer, does no matter what their skill level-- all the discarded drafts, half-finished novels, etc. It always felt like I was the only one producing 90% crap and 10% stuff I was satisfied with, and everyone else just had magic flowing from their fingertips. It wasn't until I read posts authors made of all the drafts and ephemera they wrote and abandoned before getting published that I realized I was not, in fact, the only person who stalled out on novels at 20K words, or short stories that didn't work.

If I could turn back time (if I could find a way...) I would tell my younger self to not think about whether a piece is "good" or not until they are finished, and not a moment before.


-Salom

Until "it was," that is. It's early.

-Salom

I wish I had known that all those details that I find so fascinating aren't necessarily fascinating for readers.

Stop wasting time.

I wish I'd known that I wasn't as good a writer in high school as all my teachers said I was.

Or rather, I wish I'd known that being good for a HS student didn't mean I was good enough to send my stories to pro markets. Would've saved myself the years of self-doubt all those rejections cost me.

I wish I had known that PT Barnum and H.L Menchen were right. “You Will Never Go Broke Underestimating the Intelligence or the taste of the American Public”.

I wish I'd know that everybody writes alone, but nobody becomes a writing success that way. Not just the critique aspect, but the support. It's too tough a business to lone wolf.

Nathan, you posted a link to a NYTimes profile on the iconic Amanda Hocking. Mentioned within the article is what you might call the beginning of Hocking's path to superstardom.

"She began treating writing like any other job."

This isn't just something I wish I could've told myself as a starting writer; I wish I could've told myself this as a younger man.

The great American distance runner Steve Prefontaine was fond of saying "Talent is a myth. There's no such thing as talent. If want to win at something, you find the best teacher and you practice as much as it takes to get good at it. And then you practice even more to become the best."

Like so many, I grew up believing that skill in sports, skill in academics...skill in writing...was like the powers in X-Men; some people simply had the mutation or the genetics to do the amazing. The rest of us muggles...didn't.

It's ironic this unfortunate conceit is so rampant in America; a nation built on the concept of self-determination and self-reliance.

I sometimes read about Hocking, or I check out weblit authors like Jim Zoetewey or J. A. Konrath and I wistfully wonder what might I have been if I wasn't sitting on my ass waiting for writing ability to "happen" to me.

The only thing that has lessened by bitter regret in my older years is that as long as I'm breathing...it's never too late to start.

-Bill

I wish I had known that "patience" was more than just another word in the dictionary.

Honestly... I wish I had observed more and typed less in writer forums. I'm all for interaction, but I was on AgentQuery for a while and I got myself into real trouble being snarky-turned-nasty. Trying to look smart and funny always makes me look dumb and desperate. A lesson I was shamed into learning.

Also, I wish I had believed from the get-go that editing is a LAST STEP. It would have saved me from deleting alot of perfect, irrelevant paragraphs.

Great Prefontaine quote, Bill.

I wish I had started sooner. I'd always written, but never considered it something to DO, just something that had to be done. I think about how much I could have accomplished if I'd realized at a younger age how much I truly enjoy writing.

But, I'm thankful to have found my appreciation for writing, and will "keep moving forward," as Disney said.

Thanks Nathan.

I wish I had either figured out how I needed to write (versus how everyone told me "real authors" write, oh yes, I ran into those kind of people early in my taking writing seriously days) faster than I did (10 years being a long time) or that I already knew how I needed to write, thus being able to focus on the story rather than stumbling around on trying to finish the story.

On the other hand, if I'd done anything differently, I'd be a different kind of writer today, and I'm not sure that'd be a good thing other than the fact that my epic fantasy probably would have had a better chance at getting published 10 years ago than it does today. lol

I wished I hadn't read so many writing books and just read fiction books.

I wish I'd known not to force my characters into situations but to let their story unfold as it should.

Er... I meant, I wish I had known that copy-editing comes after structural-editing. :D

I wish I had known how much I love to write twenty-five years ago. I'd be so much better (and farther along) by now.

I'm kinda pleased with the fact that I knew absolutely nothing when I started writing. No right or wrong, nothing got in the way, nothing to second guess. And I still approach it that way but with more dicipline. And I try to apply just the basic rules, in a mostly instinctive manner.
When I look back on something I wrote 20, 30 years ago and see, that wasn't half bad, I like that.

I wish I had known that I'd be writing novels at 45 years old, then. I would have hit the writing and the buisness, harder and faster. I would have made it my life then, and maybe I'd have gotten somewhere by now.
Once a fool always a fool.

"Once a fool always a fool."

As long as you draw breath, it's never to late.

I wish I had known that it would take a long time to see the book in print. That writing it would be the easy part and to really pay attention in those marketing classes you took because that is what you would be doing after you got the book into print. Also to make as many friends in the business as possible and buy a lucky rabbits foot for luck.

I would tell myself a) the fix to the story world that made it far less derivative and b) wait to revise until you've finished the first draft.

Maybe then it wouldn't have been 8 years before the first draft finally got completed.

"Finish what you start!" is what I would tell my young self, as my muse is quite easily distracted, and inspiration not always readily available.

Beyond that, I'm not sure I'd have wanted to know anything then that I didn't learn at a later point. Going into all of this as a naive dreamer benefited me, I think, because it allowed me to make mistakes and learn and grow.

If I had known about the difficulty, the constant struggles and trials that accompany writing a publishable work, it could have made me much more self-conscious, possibly paralyzing me with premature doubts and fears. The reality of writing professionally is a lot scarier and a lot harder than first imagined, after all! Easing into it, slowly replacing myths about the industry with fact, was for me the best way to go.

I wish I hadn't shown my first draft to anyone.

And I'm glad I didn't know how long it would take to get to the finished product.

I wish I could tell my younger writing self,

"Hon, this novel isn't as good as you think it is. This first draft you've got here? That's the rough chunk of marble you just carved out of a cliffside. Now, you need to start coaxing a beautiful statue out of it. This is a craft, babydoll. It takes time, patience, and hard work. Now go on. You can do this." :)

I wish I'd known that some of these goddamn online romance reviewers would be so snarky, and able to get away with so many questionable things no one else seems able to get away with.

Sometimes dreams come true V.....E.....R.....Y..........S.....L.....O.....W.....L.....Y

Hindsight is always good to evaluate every now and then.

Like Rod Stewart sings (paraphrased):I wish I had known then what I know now. I also wish I had found a mentor who wanted to coach me for free. I could have used that.

I thought the writing would go faster, but I found out a lot of our interior selves goes into what we create. For me that means, thinking about the storyline (A LOT) and hashing it out with my Ideal Reader, and Best Crit Partner (my support team).

I also wish I had known I would enjoy blogging as much, because it allows me to integrate my love of photography into the writing of the posts.

Writing restores my equilibrium, and gives me an outlet for my imagination.

It would have been nice to know that the more I write the easier it becomes. When I first started it was easy to write the first part of a story, but difficult to finish. Now it's easy for me to finish what I start, too. It would have been encouraging to know that.

That most agents lost sight of their role, thinking that they were in the "selling to publishers" business, but rather are in the "helping their authors reach the greatest number of readers and achieve the greatest possible commercial and literary success" business. -- Barry Eisler

Also, that going the Legacy Publishing route isn't the only way to make money and achieve the above stated ends.

I would tell my younger self this is a long-haul proposition so settle my butt in for the ride.

I wish I had known there were resources out there that could teach me how to do it right from the beginning - or at least less wrong. I spent a lot of time writing really badly. Really. Really. Badly.

I would tell my younger self to start writing right then and there, instead of wasting a bunch of time figuring out other stuff to do with my life! Writing is it, but it took me ten years to figure that out.

That by the time I finished a particular book, the market would be flooded with them.

I wish I'd known there was an automatic line spacer button in Word. I double-spaced my first entire manuscript manually. D'oh!

That the world will do it's best to distract you, derail you. DON'T LET IT.

I would have told myself to get it on paper and worry about quality later. I spent far too much time trying to write brilliant first drafts. Or sometimes just waiting for brilliant inspiration.

I should have looked at it as the faster you get the bad stuff out, the quicker you get to the good stuff. I'd sum it up as: Never rejected. Never published.

it is funny. there are things i wish i had known, like to be really consistent with names and nicknames of characters as fixing it all later is a nightmare and then there are things i am so happy i did not know. if i had know that it would be six years between beginning the writing and seeing it in barnes and noble, i might never have done it! but i am so happy i went into it blind and just kept going!

In practical terms, to OUTLINE!!!! To have some idea of where a story is GOING before just plunging in with what I thought then was lovely prose. (Ahem.)

But to my younger, child self? That what I think and feel matters, and that writing is a boundless place to explore all of that. That the confines of everyday life don't exist there.

Anon(who wished for automatic double-space knowledge)--I had already written two whole books before someone showed me how to use the automatic-paragraph-indent in Word! I hadn't known such a thing existed. I couldn't believe how many spacebar hits I'd wasted! It was a glorious discovery. =P

I wish I'd realized that as busy as I thought I was in college, I was totally wrong and should have been using that time to get more writing done! So much Ninja Gaiden...

I wish I'd known there was a huge list of things I didn't even know I didn't know.

I wish I'd told myself to never slow down, to keep on writing and writing and writing and writing no matter how much the ideas sucked! You can always make it better later.

I wouldn't tell my beginning writer-self anything. In fact, there are quite a few things I'd love to un-tell my current writer-self. Like how frustrating it will be to find an agent or a publisher. How disheartening it is to get critique advice from people who clearly don't like anything about your writing/genre/characters/voice. How many hours can be spent re-writing and re-writing and re-writing. And re-writing.

I would dearly love to get back to that initial enthusiasm and confidence and sense of wonder that carried me through a NaNoWriMo with stars in my eyes.

I still love writing, but its like marriage. The newlywed days are over and now I have to face the day-to-day reality of sweaty socks and morning breath.

It's OK to change your plans along the way.

Seriously. I'm cool with revising outlines, changing character names and titles and subplots and whatever, and most everything else now, but starting out, I was so rigid. I had to conform to my original vision or I was betraying something. Going with the flow makes me a lot less stressed out and probably prepares me better for dealing with the publishing world when/once I do sell a book.

I'm only just starting now, but I would love to tell me 10 years ago that it's OK to write with the aim of making money out of it, and that you're never too young to get started.

I wish that I knew earlier what true editing entailed. I used to think it was all about fixing the wording. Now I understand that it involves so much more. Pacing, structure, plot, and so on.

I also wish I'd been less stubborn about not outlining back them. My books would have been a lot better when I first started if I'd planned better.

I don't think I'd change things. I've learned so much since I started, especially in the last five years. It's a huge and incredible journey, and knowing too much would have made those first steps more intimidating.

I think while we're learning about business and craft, so much time has to be spent writing and editing peers (but especially writing) in order to grow properly--at least that's true for me. I simply wasn't ready, but I wouldn't have learned all I had if I had known that. I think the writing, the rejections, the critique groups--it all seasons us. And if we persevere, we turn out better for it.

There are still so many people who know so much more than I do, and there always will be. Always. But I'll learn over time, as I'm ready for each new discovery. The unknown helps fuel me because I continue to believe something great is around the next corner--and if not there, the corner after that. I wouldn't want anyone--not even my future self--to tell me otherwise.

Since I came to writing a little later in life-43,I'm still learning the ropes. I have no regrets so far. Every mistake I've made I've learned from.It's a journey I have fell in love with.

That writing a book is not as easy as reading one.

that I can't stop

I wish I'd known how to bake an angel food cake and how to become invisible and how to fly.

That I'm not alone!

When I started the writing process I didn't know any writers. At first I never thought to look online and find some, then I figured I would write the first draft and deal with the rest afterwards. Had I known what an amazing community was out there, just waiting to be introduced to me, I would've gotten involved a lot sooner.

That being said, I can appreciate the way things have turned out so far. It'd have been nice to know I wasn't alone earlier on, but at the same time, I appreciate things a little differently having found them late.

That maintaining a hard daily writing routine was far more important than any single book.

By 'hard' I mean truly working at getting better, studying others' work that I felt had power, actively trying out different approaches, not settling for - in the words of Edward de Bono - 'the first right answer.' In other words, that writing is more than merely typing words that I made up in my head.

Fortunately, I did figure those things out, it just took longer than I would've liked.

Still struggling with the 'daily' part, though.

I wish I could have told myself that even if I've seen some really lousy and boring books get published. That doesn't necessarily mean my awesome engaging totally unique book is going to have an easy time convincing an agent to take a chance.

I think I'd also have told myself not to put all my hopes in one dream agent with a dreamy smile. Cause when you get rejected by the one you'd been hoping for for your whole third draft ... huts like a bugger!

Nathan, I like what you learned about writing. I agree that the journey a writer takes in creating each manuscript is an awesome experience – it’s like visiting a brand new world and walking around inside it every time you write a manuscript.

As far as what I wish I had known when I started writing ... I wish I had known how much I would love it, and wish I had double-majored in Creative Writing in college and gone on to get an M.F.A. in Creative Writing. I originally went to college for Journalism, switched my major to Psychology, and later went to graduate school in Clinical Psychology. I still love Psychology and enjoyed working in that field, but I wish I had started writing novels much sooner than I did.

That I'm at my best when I'm writing. I think that would've prompted me to start earlier.

I wish I'd have had something impossible; the long view.

Oh, and that it's addicting.

It's okay not to know what you're doing. The only right way is your way. So write. Just write. Process and craft and such will come later. Enjoy the freedom while you can.

The Art of conflict bridging and spoon-feeding tension. Oh. And to never tell ANYONE other than your spouse/sig-other that you're writing a book.

500 words a day is better than 2,000 in the occasional flash of inspired brilliance.

And what Rob Smith said about Ninja Gaiden...

I wish I'd known what Hemingway wrote about dealing with writer's block: All you have to do is write one true sentence. Just write the truest sentence that you know, and take it from there. It always works.

What a powerful topic and comments. I'm flagging this to re-read.

For me, I wish I'd known not to ever ask other people about:

a. Whether I should write.

b. What I should write.

To trust myself.

Still learning that at deeper levels.

I wish I'd started earlier. I'm still relatively young, but when I think of those long holidays I had at school and university, I wish I had spent some of those weeks writing. I have much shorter holidays now that I have a full-time job, and I want to spend some of them, you know, actually taking a trip.

I wish I had known I was living in the golden age of publishing. There were dozens of mainstream magazines actively looking for short fiction. I sold a few stories, then got busy with a job and stopped submitting. I thought I could always get back to it when I had more time.

Here's what I'm glad I didn't know: it would take eleven manuscripts, eleven years, and hundreds of rejections to sell that first book.

Thankfully, I was blissfully unaware and kept plugging away.

I wish I'd known it's not the writing; it's the RE-WRITING!

I'm actually glad I didn't know at the beginning that the revising would be harder than the writing (for me at least). Sometimes ignorance is bliss.

That writing isn't about words. It's about being really good at imagining things -- people, places, events, etc.

I wish I had known . . . not to buy writing chairs I didn't want my butt to grow into.

I wish I had known I was going to try churn my hobby into a full-time career. At least then I would have had my story straight and my future outlined. And I wouldn't have burnt/shredded all those 200 page novels I'd handwritten because I thought they were utter poop. Would have saved me so much time than trying to start them again from scratch.
The stupidity of youth. *smacks younger self*

I wish I'd known that a novel isn't done because you're tired of it. That it's done when it's done, when it's the best story possible. Like my grandmother always said about any recipe she passed along, "cook until done!"

"Hurry the hell up and write the damn thing instead of noodling around on all these writing blogs!" ;)

I second what Rick Daley said. Although, as a fan of cheesy Italian dishes, I immediately assumed that the speaker with accent of unknown origin simply could not spell "manicotti."

word ver: walibuse: the thirteenth attempt at hanging your favorite velvet painting (of the Virgin Mary posing with both Elvis and her son) on the flaking plaster above the fireplace...nothing to do with wallabies. NickB

Seriously though, maybe: read more and widely. And yes, past self, it's okay to read when you Should Be writing. It's school. NickB

I wish I'd known more about POV--I feel like I'm back in college creative writing class when I spend time with my crit group. It's good for me, but sometimes I feel incredibly dumb!

I wish I had known how much writing would consume me... and I wish I'd been able to prepare my family for the hours and hours I would spend behind the closed door. We've settled into a rhythm now but it took a while and it wasn't pretty.

I wish I'd known it takes me 20-25 drafts before I'm moderately happy with any given manuscript.

I wish I'd known that I really could write, but that it would take creating a few "drawer" novels before I began to understand the craft of fiction.

I wish I'd known how much I was going to fall in love with it! Then I wouldn't have dabbled so long, and I would have sunk my teeth in a lot sooner!

Who in their right mind goes into the world-creating business? Leave it to the gods.

Stop making people smile so much, and quit with the stage directions.

Oh, and pick a POV for heaven's sake!

Had anyone take twenty minutes of class time in any of the three semester long course I took in creative writing to explain “character driven” versus “content driven” vs. “journalistic style” and other terms that I do not as yet know, and give a list of authors who exemplified those styles. I think I would have found my voice a little faster. On the other hand, there is something to be said for the joy of discovery.

Nathan, what a wonderful topic. I'm reading every response and nodding like a bobblehead doll. I also love the Goya painting at the top of the screen.

I wish I had known:

To stop straining so hard to make perfect sentences and just say it.

That if something bothers me, polishing and polishing isn't going to fix it. If it stinketh, it stinketh and needeth to be trashed.

I wish I discovered sooner that a good writer is not something you *are*, but something you can become after years and years of hard work and deliberate practice.

I also wish I’d been okay with failure sooner and realized how much each (mis)step helps me grow. I love Eric Weiner’s analogy in “The Geography of Bliss.” All of the crap we write is like fertilizer – it is necessary and allows the good stuff to grow.

I wish I had known how many people who can write were going to tell me how to fix my work... Agents, Managers, Producers, Directors, Actors and everyone else who has never written a complete script and never will. Especially agents.

I wish I had known that every step of the way is worth it and one should not give up. The end result will surprise you and you will thoroughly enjoy the fun along the way. Keep writing!

I would have said to my younger writing self, and I say to all young writers,
WRITE
Do not waste that which is given to you in youth TIME.
BLINK and these precious moments are gone.

I agree with Bill: I wish I'd known to treat a writing career like I would any other start-up company, with the big investment (of time, and money) that it takes to get a business off the ground. That means plugging eight hours a day into it (if not more) for a long, long time.

I wish I had known not to focus on just writing a book. There are so many other ways to have freedom in your writing-magazines, blogs, devotions, cards, etc.
The true writer is just happy to write in whatever venue is presented to them.
I would tell a younger writer that writing is a journey and a process. You never "arrive". You keep moving along learning as you go.

Wow. Provocative question.

I wish I had known how darn hard it really is to get a book published traditionally, after you've written it, revised it, found a literary agent who loves it, only to find the potential publishers already have a series in that genre, or aren't convinced there's a market for a story set in another country, or only want "best sellers" with other marketing possibilities (toys, movies, etc).

That's why P-O-D self-publishing via Amazon's arm has become a God-send to me.

That said, whenever I get frustrated about it, I remember complaining to my first agent about how much time and energy writing, trying to be published, and trying hard to write literary fiction well without compromising on my sense of it as an art form requiring dilligence and practice and study as well as execution like all the other arts was taking out of my life, and my marriage at the time.

His extremely sharp (he was a "tough love" type of guy) response: "who ever told you this was going to be easy?"

So. He, as almost always, was right. RIP, Ray-buddy. Thanks for your selfless devotion for the first decade of my trying to get published.

from Ira Glass: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI23U7U2aUY


“What nobody tells people who are beginners — and I really wish someone had told this to me . . . is that all of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste.

But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, and it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not.

But your taste...is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you...A lot of people never get past this phase. They quit...

It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions."

I think what you write hear about being too focused on the end result -- that's where I am now. I have to get back to writing for the love of it. Thanks.

Dianna Zaragoza said...
I wish I had known that I didn't have to be perfect the first time...that there's lots of opportunity for do-overs. That, in fact, the do-overs (editing) is the part where the story really blossoms.

Couldn't agree more, Dianna. I kept trying to get it DONE... then I realized how much better the story became, how much more insight I gained, as the editing began. That was a golden revelation.

Multi-task over linear progression. When the rough draft of my novel was done I had it edited. I sat around for a week with nothing to do but wait. When it was done and did a second and third edit I just waited. Once that was done, then I looked into book covers. THAT took 4 weeks. Then all the ISBN, Printer, Format etc etc etc.

Now that I know first had what it takes, I would have started the book cover project right off. Split my work into five or ten chapter chunks to be edited while I was still writing. Had all the paper work etc done before hand to sell a book. I could have easily cut out 50% of the time it took from first word typed to holding a finished book in my hand by multi-tasking.

I wish I knew people would like what I write as much as they do. I wouldn't have quit for all those years, and I'd have a book or two out there already. Also, I wish I knew Kindle would come along as a safety net for those who fail with the standard publishing. It wouldn't have seemed like such an all or nothing tribulation.

I wish I had known that my neighbor's mother was going to make her return my book for a full refund. In that case, I never would've toiled over producing a copy of my fully illustrated book about my dog. 1982. My driveway. The card table. Passing back two dimes and a nickel. Someone should've warned me!

What would I tell my younger self? Hmmm...

Self, writing is a process. It's not just tossing words on a blank piece of paper and then off to publish. You've been watching too many TV and movie plots that make it sound so glamorous. It's not. It's a job. And it's a process. Do yourself a big favor and learn. Read a whole hell of a lot. Then, write a lot more. And learn the process--writing, rewriting, polishing. And then rejection and trying again and again. And to always keep writing. Never stop writing. You have a beautiful road ahead of you and it's going to be a slog sometimes and a joy most of the time. But respect the process, respect the words, and respect the readers. THEN, you have a really good shot at it all.

I wish I had taken the time in the beginning to do all my research. That way, when it was time to go back and start the endless editing process, I could focus less on looking up all those facts I'd told myself I would "just figure out later."
Granted, I am still in the younger writer version of myself, but I wish I'd known the above while writing the first draft.

I wish I'd known to put the writing books down (I've read them enough) and to strive for honesty. To avoid holding back or trying too hard, because writing shows it.

So I'd say grab a beer, blast your favorite music and write about thing you keep trying to avoid--whatever scares you or makes you nervous-- start there.

Nothing! Because if I had known then what I know now about writing novels, I am not sure I would have three finished novels and one partial.I'm not published yet,but I can't and won't stop writing.I may not be the next Nora Roberts,Anne Bishop,etc.But I plan to be the first ME!

I wish I had read a great deal more...I read next to nothing except my Engineering books at University, and during a two year long project in my day job. I wish I had realised much earlier that all I wanted to do was to write, and to make more time for it. I wish I had had more writer friends to compare notes on the art and craft of writing.

Those who can, write; those who can't, talk about it.

I loooove Pink Floyd!

I really love both first and third person.

When it comes to reading, I like first person because I like seeing the mistakes the narrator makes in assessing situations. That being said, it also drive me crazy. But in a good way.

When it comes to writing, I prefer to write in third person. I really don't have a reason for why I prefer it. I'm sure subconsciously my favorite books are written this way, so I am trying to mimic them.

Great post!

Excellent post. Probably the best explanation I've seen.

I almost always write in the third person because I like the control it gives me. But the few things I've written in the first person have always been excellent sellers. I've never gone into detailed analysis, but I've often wondered if it meant something about readers preferring first person.

Anyone looking for a really good use of first-person should read the Travis McGee books by John D. MacDonald. 20+ novels all told in first person, and you get to see exactly what Nathan's talking about: the discrepancy between the character's perspective, and the real world comes through in the way the protagonist filters the world. They're also exciting reads in their own right. Enjoy!

I love Brent Hartinger's "Geography Club" and its sequels. Such a witty narrative voice. "Split Screen" is even more fun, because the first part is from Russel's perspective, and the second part is from his best friend Min's (both of them are complete books, over the same time period). It's fun to find out things that are happening when one of the POV characters are not around.

"The Half-Life of Planets" is also a good read, because the story alternates between two perspectives: a girl who's labeled a slut, and a boy who has Asperger's. The voices are so different, but so engaging.

Ah. I love first-person stories when they're executed well.

While that approach to first person is certainly one approach i don't think it's the most common. Usually first person provides the reader the same perspective as the MC and we learn stuff as he does, tension being generated by whatever makes him tense. So if he gets home to find a note saying his girl's been kidnapped, then we feel his fear for her. If it turns out she was in on the kidnapped and not much of a girlfriendhe'll probably start to suspect something's not quite right at the same time As we do.

The type of 1st person story where the MC doesn't know what's really going on, and the reader does isn't the first that springs to mind with 1st person POV, for me anyway.

mood
Moody Writing
@mooderino

The Elevator Test! Perfect. Need to share this with my critique group tonight. Thanks!

This is one concept in writing that I just don't get. When I'm doing the writing, I just can't wrap my mind around the differences. Reading them is different. I get it. I just can't seem to bring it to the page naturally.

Great post! I'm going to listen to "Dark Side of the Moon" now.

Great explanation. I enjoy reading and writing both first and third person.

First can be a little tricky at times. You can't write about what's happening in the next room unless the MC overhears. ;)

Love the elevator test. :)

I tend to be picky about reading first-person. To me, the best first-person narratives are ones where the POV character has not just a perspective, but some kind of agenda. You get the sense there is a reason they are telling this story, and an unseen audience they are telling it to (who may or may not be the reader), as opposed to just the inner dialog of someone narrating a play-by-play version of events, as though they're talking to themselves.

For instance, "The Handmaid's Tale" is a secret diary, an expose. "Catcher in the Rye" and "Lolita" both feel like defenses/confessionals.

I totally agree with your point re: people sometimes using third person to give too much detail -- to tell, rather than show. I see that more than anything else in my critique/editing work.

That said, I often see in first person a desire to showcase voice over action, especially if it's a humorous voice. I get lost in so many asides and so much internal commentary, I forget what's going on in the scene!

The few first person books I've read, I feel 'robbed' of a good story. There is so much beyond the single POV that I want to know. So now, if I see a story in 1st person, I don't bother.

First person is an immediate turn-off for me but sometimes the writing is good enough that I can keep going.

I am sooo much more comfortable writing in first person but, the last novel I drafted, it became clear to me that the narrator was kind of weak and annoying.

I've read too many books that made me want to smack the narrator. I scrapped that one and I'm trying my hand at third person.

Only thing is, I get sick of typing the mc's name. That's a minor gripe but still... :)

Excellent post - totally on point, clear explanation. Completely agree with you about what makes each voice compelling! Also, love how you tend to make equations about this kind of thing. :)

Gorgeous picture.

"The tension in third person is between what the reader sees in the outside world and what is actually happening from the characters' perspectives."
This is the most helpful sentence I've read on 3rd person outside of John Gardner. Thanks,

I just can't seem to do first person when I try. It often just stalls. So that's why I do third. I can get into more people's heads and make a much more interesting book with more detail and less telling that way.

First person narrative tends to be more 'it's all about me and how I'm feeling' and less about the world and what's going on around the character. Which is great if you want a YA book that explores a character who's focus is growing up or learning something about themselves. But for a more interesting read on the outside influences to their lives, I tend to like third person. Because there is more to a person than the person themselves.

I think that 1st person vs. 3rd person depends on the story.

If there's a lot going on in a story, I'm using 3rd person for my main WiP because I have multiple perspectives on the unfolding story and I wanted to change story lines as seamlessly as possible. Having to explain which character is doing the talking would make the story too complicated.

On the other hand, my secondary WiP is in first person, because the tension in the story comes from the fact that the main character has to deal with disparities between her memory and what is considered normal. So in her head is the best place to be.

:-)

I find I really love first person in YA fiction, as it forces the author to try to think like a teen and decreases the possibilities of the author's falling into didactic mode. That being said, I love Rowling's style, and she, of course, writes in limited 3rd person most of the time.
For adult's books, either 1st or 3rd person can work -- and, occasionally in literary fiction, even 2nd person can work. It depends on the author's skill and style.

I wrote a draft of a YA contemporary fantasy in 3rd person. As I researched YA as a genre I had a hard time finding any 3rd person perspectives; almost all YA seems to be in 1st person. I think there's a reason for this, that it can be easier to connect wtih a character initially when told in the character's voice. Maybe that appeals more to younger readers. It's interestign to play around with POV to see what works best. I used to be annoyed with 1st person, but it depends on the character and story.

I have to agree with Shawn Lamb -

I feel like it's easy to get robbed of interesting story in 1st person. One of my favorite series is written in 1st, but the other characters are constantly having to fill the MC in on what happens when he's not around.

In 3rd, not only can you see what's going on elsewhere, you get it filtered through someone else's worldview. I also like playing with how different characters perceive each other.

On the other hand, I feel like a character's personality just SHINES in 1st person in a way it doesn't in 3rd.

I like both when I read, but I much prefer writing in limited 3rd.

If you can name one person who'd enjoy being stuck in an elevator with Holden Caufield, I'll give you a million dollars.*

*Offer only open to those who've seen J.D. Salinger in person

You have to write out of a voice with which you can, at the very least, marginally identify. You can't ask for advice on which tense, point of view or tone you should employ any more than you can ask a personal shopper to tell you who you are.

Well. I suppose you can but then the personal shopper oughta get the byline.

Incidentally, I write first-person, present-tense narrative and feel a deep immediacy to my narrators in that way. But this may not work in the least for the guy in the hat at the next screen.

Do your own thing, writers. Over time-- mastery.

Two cents.

I favor third person in both reading and writing, but if the writing is good, I can enjoy a book in 1st person.

For Shawn who commented before me, you might want to try The Help. It's in first person, but the pov person changes between four different characters, if I remember correctly. Each chapter is soley from one person's pov, so it isn't confusing, and it is so well-written, it's never confusing. I didn't think I'd like it at first, but ended up loving it.

Great post, Nathan. For myself, my first inclination is always to write in first person so I do. For five pages. That length is usually enough to figure out if I can tell the story that way (and if I am bored to tears of the narrator). If it isn't, I re-write in some variation of 3rd. In rare cases that I haven't become sick of the 1st person, I figure that's the sign, so I stick with it.

I think of it as the five page gymnastics test. If I'm having to do a lot of mental gymnastics to knock out 5 pages, I picked the wrong type of narration.

I honestly hate third person. There is an author I really like (but don't love)and will read (but not buy)all of her books. I think the thing that keeps her from being really great is the 3rd person narration. Idk, something about first person really helps me to connect to the MC. I've only read one 3rd person book that really made me empathize with the character.

Great description. There's more variety available in third person if only because of the different options. You can get almost as good as first person by using the very close, third person. Jo Rowling used it with the HP books. With only a handful of exceptions, everything the reader sees is through the Harry filter. That includes all his biases.

I fairly strongly prefer third person close. I only want to see into one head at a time. I like the 3rd person better than first though, because first gives a self importance to a character who needs to tell the story themselves or something... there are books that overcome it really well (a lot of them) but there are also a lot of them that read like diaries and that bugs me. I REALLY don't like omniscient, and I ALSO really don't like objective... I want to know what SOMEBODY is thinking.

Really liked this post, Nathan. This is one of those decisions that either falls out naturally due to the type of story, or it causes us much consternation.

I'm not fond of first person, in my writing or reading (especially first person, present tense). Just my perspective, but 1st person seems to be popular in young adult, and I wonder if that's due to the immediate feeling one can get -- like talking to your BFF. This may be a current trend, but still. . .

My preference is for third person, sometimes omniscient, sometimes limited. I do like to know some of the character's thoughts or even all their thoughts, depending on the situation. I enjoy good narrative, sprinkled with lots of
dialogue.

An annoying narrator will turn me off a book before I get very far along in the story. It's a fine balance to get the voice just right for the story being told.

Looking forward to reading all the discussion comments on this subject.

I've written in both, and to me, it may sound counterintuitive, but I think the reader can become more intimate with a character written in third person.

When I read something in first person, I'm constantly thinking - wow, I wouldn't do that, say that, think that. When it's third person, I'm more willing to sit back and wait to be shown why that character is doing, saying or thinking something. I trust it will be revealed sooner or later, and am willing to go along for the ride.

I seem to be one of the rare people who prefer first person. I really like to get into the protagonists head, and for the most part, first person gives me that.

I find that often third person leads to too many characters and too many subplots. Just too much to keep track of for the light urban fantasy that I prefer.

Funny, I'm also picky about tense and prefer past tense.

Of course, good writing is good writing, so I'm not that picky.

Wish I could add some tips, however, you you said about tension in relation to the first person pov, was powerful and something I should've known years ago.

But right now, it's in my secret arsenal of composition notes, that are handwritten even.

Thanks Nathan!

"The absolute most important thing to keep in mind as you're crafting a first person narrative is that everything that occurs has to be filtered through your narrator's perspective."

As always there are exceptions that prove the rule. James Patterson outsells everybody with his first person Alex Cross thrillers, yet always manages to show the villains in third person when convenient.

As an author I hate it when he does that. It just screams WRONG!

As a reader I keep going back for more.

This is a great post, Nathan, just what I needed to hear. I have a third person novel I wrote eight years ago and foolishly published through a POD concern. Now that it's rights are back to me I thought about rewriting it in first person. It's Early Teen and like YA, seems to work well in first person. I've begun, but find that I'm also writing it in present tense, that the MC is relating events as they happen. Not comfortable with this, but don't know exactly how to make it sound as good in past tense. Your thoughts, and anyone else have this problem, if indeed it is one?

I agree with Shawn and Michael. Because I never could stand first person. I used to endure it, but lately whenever I open a book and learn it's first person, I put it right back down.

It's just not for me.

I'll give an example. I started reading this novel not long ago. It was in first person and the narrator went on to describe her reaction when she saw a handsome man. She wrote something to the effect of, "...my pussy twitched..."

Seeing that I've been a man all my life, I felt very uncomfortable suddenly having a pussy. And a twitching one? I didn't even know they could do that!

I enjoy reading both; I enjoy writing both, when executed well (and that disclaimer is aimed at myself as much as it is at anyone else). One way around the issue (mentioned above) with the first-person narrative being too limiting is to offer multiple first-person accounts (e.g. Jodi Picoult's My Sister's Keeper or Chris Bohjalian's Trans-Sister Radio).

I chose to write my first novel, a YA fantasy, in first person for a number of reasons.
1. Its easier for young writers because you don't have to make the decision about which character's perspective you should write from for each scene like you do in 3rd person limited.
2. Its easier to show the reader who your character is.
3. Its way easier to make your main character funny, sad, misunderstood, etc. (although I chose it for the humor aspect mostly)

All that being said, I like 3rd person a lot in adult literature and epic fantasy because the world can feel so much bigger, and the reader can get to know so many more characters.

The most interesting twist on 1st person I've read lately is House Rules by Jodi Piccoult, but I think this should be approached with caution. She is very good, but I feel like I might not know my characters well enough up front to differentiate as well as she did (I'm not a big outliner/planner:).

I'm curious, why didn't you reference first person plural, or second person? I know, they're rarely used, but I'd be interested in your take on them - & other variants.

Most writers these days (especially in YA fiction) tend to jump into first person as though it's a given. But as you say, an unlikeable narrator can kill a story, especially one of those whiny ones!
Also a large number of writers unfortunately think that present tense goes along with first person, which can get you into all sorts of problems with tedious rhythm and verb constructions. Ugh.
I suspect readers think they want first person because of the world now - reality TV, instant communication, FB etc, but maybe us writers should make a big move back to third person, and show the world as being about more than one character and one problem.
I'm blogging about POV at the moment and it's giving me lots to ponder!

I believe some genres lend themselves better to 1st person POV than others. Also, the reason that I think people enjoy 1st person is that it is easier for a reader to project themeself into that character's shoes. This means the conflict has more punch, twists seem more personal, and overall story becomes truncated, rather than expansive. The biggest tip (no news here) is that the narrator has to be likeable.

In third person, authors love the freedom and versatility. The challenge becomes that too much information can dull your reader to the conflict.

So, I think 1st person POV provides such a narrow viewpoint, it creates a personal, harrowing, tour-de-force experience for the reader. On the other hand, third person POV lends itself to a larger, more complex view of a story, allowing an author more control of the information to which the reader is exposed.

I went to Amazon and looked at the 25 top-selling novels (with kindle versions). More of them are first person POV (64%) than third person (36%). If you're interested in the details, the numbers are here.

I've found that when writing in the first person that I'M tired of my main character then it's time to reevaluate - or have them devoured by marmots.

The only first person fiction I've written has the narrator dying in the first sentence! It's liberating to write in first person, there's a looseness to it that aids in the flow of words. I choose to write most fiction in third person because the omniscient POV serves the complexity required of my story.

I prefer to write in first person. My protagonist or main characters are usually creations that I strongly identify with and their story's and dialouge consist of things I'm personaly interested in or want to say or address, but not always. It's kinda like acting where I get to play a role and participate rather than just observe and dictate.
It's harder to do, stay in character that way, and I've heard people say things to the contrary when it comes to writing in 1st. But writing in another characters skin that's nothing like you, is hard and you have to constantly watch for tense,tense can get slippery, but it's great fun to walk in those shoes and feel them come to life.

There is also the sense of immediacy that shows through in first person narrative that is often missing in third person.

I feel it depends entirely on the story and which fits the overall "feel" more naturally.

There is a another option that one of the commenters mentioned in passing: third person limited. The reader knows first hand only what one character knows, but that character has to be the MC (or protagonist) or someone intimately close to the MC. Third person limited naturally omits the whining and self-obsession many readers dislike in first-person writing. And yet it opens up the story to epic complexity without removing the personal, human take on what it all means.

Currently, it seems most of the books I am reading are in first person. Thanks for the explanation, but can you give some good examples of 3rd person. The omniscent thing is still confusing to me.

There is third person omniscient and third person limited. third person omniscient lets you in on every aspect going on from different characters, but as Nathan said, it doesn't mean you tell everything. Third person limited is very similar to first person, because it follows only one character around, but it more limited than 1st person because you are more obligated to show. I am glad that I clicked on this blog tonight. I hadn't looked at it in awhile and I was having withdrawals. This was a very good blog to read to get my fix.

As a mater lecture as that was, I say write it like you like it and don't worry about who's person it is coming from. That's for scholars to debate. I say, tell the story you must tell in a way that seems beautiful to you. All this first person and third person is old-hat book selling, giving literature professors a job. No offense to anyone. I say three perspectives weaved into a whole is far more interesting than, say, Salinger. He was interesting enough at the time, but man, now, that is kindergarten (Is that a German word?.) My Nemesis is The Third Policeman and the other works that Irish man has done. I think Two Birds at Swim is another. First or third person? As writers? Is there a difference? For simple readers, there just might be. I don't know. I know this is a throw from way left field, but I can't help but think about it.

Neil & others, I don't know why you all think first person must be present tense. Listen to someone telling a story (their trip to the mall yesterday, or whatever.) They use past tense, but sometimes switch to present tense, especially for dialog, or for a dramatic incident. Just do what feels natural.

As a newbie writer, I can't imagine doing anything but first person. It keeps me focused. I don't get bogged down in detail (as I did in history tests.) I don't have to worry about voice, because the voice is the voice of my protagonist, so if I nail that I'm OK.

I prefer reading first person,too--fact or fiction. More immediate. Whatever.

By the way, if any emotional comment creeps into my story, I usually have to take it out. My narrator is not in touch with his feelings. They emerge through the narrative, though.

Marion, you're confusing me. If you are writing a first person narrative and leaving the first person perspective out of the book, what are you writing? No offense, but a text book? I don't know if you have realized this yet, as a newbie, as you called it, but everything the narrator, what we are calling first person in this post, is the poetry of the story, the words that are worth reading. So, if you leave them out, and I'm not really sure what you're saying, what are we reading. Possibly omniscient? I would need to read your stuff to know. Nathan is pretty good about that on his forums. Last time I checked, which seems now to be another life time ago. But give it a shot. Most writers actually love and support other writers. I could, of course, be naive, and Nathan is a hand wringing evil troll that has set this whole web site up to steal people's genius ideas. But, I'm going with don't be shy or paranoid and throw it out there and let his fans tell you what they think. And Him, or he. Subject or object. I'm still having trouble with that. Anyway, writ it out.

Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have truly enjoyed browsing your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing to your rss feed and I hope you write again soon!
London Hotels

I'm just beginning to write my novel based on my outline, and decided to write it first-person, so your blog could not have been more timely.

As far as a best example of how first-person can let you crawl into the character's perspective, is in the book "Chocolat" upon which the movie was based. It alternates chapters - one is from Vienne, the chocolate-shop owner, then one from the viewpoint of the priest of the same events. Fantastic writing, and it's all about what isn't said, or how the characters think. As the reader, you can see who is good and who is evil, but the characters (especially the priest) are viewing it the other way around.

Great distinction between first and third, Nathan! I started my current project in first and didn't realize this is such a sticky subject. But I guess it's like anything else-subjective and about preferences. My protagonist lives a secret double life so it needed to be told from her view. And I've never had so much fun. First was a new beast for me, but I'm happy I went this way. A blast.

I tend to write in both first and third person, letting the story dictate which perspective works best for it. Overall, my play-by-post role-playing tends to be in third-person and my independent fiction tends to be in first.

I don't usually have trouble unless it's a writing *assignment*, in which case I nearly always have trouble finding the character's true voice. Not sure exactly why that is.

Where's tuesdays post?

anon-

The dog ate it. Sorry!

Overall, I prefer the 3rd person pov because if I don't have enough in common with the main character in a 1st person pov, I can't empathize with that character and I'm already left out of the storyline from the first pages.

That said, if the 1st person pov is someone I can empathize with, then the story becomes more personal. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen as often. I read for escapism. I like the adventurous, dangerous life of fictional characters probably because I don't live that way thereby making it harder to read from the 1st person. As much as I would love to be Lara Crofts, James Bond or Indiana Jones, I'm not.

This ideology may account for my reduced reading of YA novels in the last 15 years. No, I didn't suddenly become an adult, but I could no longer identify with protagonists in the video age with cell phones, absent parenting, and a mall lifestyle.

I think mass reader identification is the key to whether or not to use 1st or 3rd person pov. Ask yourself, "Who is my audience? Who is going to read this book?"

www.TammySetzerDenton.com

Thank you for this! You just confirmed my decision to keep my novel in the third person.

I appreciate your analysis of the key differences between the two viewpoints. I am in the process of re-writing my novel from the third person into the first person because two editors at a writing conference suggested it. I have been questioning my decision but proceeded anyway. I see now, given my protagonist's view of the world, why these agents suggested the change. Thank you!

I enjoy both equally when they're well done -- but I think first person is harder to do well, and so far I've always written in the third person myself.

You didn't mention this, Nathan, but first person is harder to handle grammatically -- among other things, verb tense errors creep in; the author should be switching from past tense (to tell the story) to present tense (when the narrator makes a statement about the world or human nature or something else that was not just true in the past, but is still true). Not handling verb tenses properly leads to awkwardness and a kind of micro-confusion about what's true right now vs what used to be true but isn't anymore.

Also, first person introduces the question of the frame story -- who is telling the story to whom and why and how long after the action is over? A poor frame story can make the real story feel awkward, but if there's no frame story, then that lack can feel awkward as well.

One great resource is Orson Scott Card's book on character and viewpoint. He spends quite a bit of time analyzing first versus third person and the problems and advantages of each. It's one of the few books on writing which actually seemed helpful to me.

I think both first and third person have their place. My preference for writing is first person. This is because I'm writing character-based books, and I love reading these types of books in the first person. I feel like I connect with the characters on a deeper level when the books are in first person. But there are many other types of books that third person is really well suited for.