The Sheen of Exotica

The draw of faraway places lures many readers to open the front cover of a book. The remote land of the Lapps—the reindeer herders—might spark curiosity in anyone with fond memories of Christmas. A novel featuring the Chechen revolt might stir the feelings of anyone who once hated the Evil Empire. No matter what the foreign culture, a writer with knowledge of it can use the thought “I’d like to find out more about that” as an enticement.

At first blush, the prospect seems so rich. If an author has personal experience with such natives, that can form the foundation for all sorts of explorations into cultural mores. The odd food these people enjoy for breakfast is only one of the fascinating facts that can be meticulously researched, filling reams of pages. “Ew!” you can almost hear the gleeful writer murmur when coming upon such a morsel.

Deeper penetration can lead to a cast of characters who emblemize the different qualities of the exotic tribe. A common pairing is a chieftain who cherishes age-old traditions facing rebellion by his cellphone-obsessed son, or the like. Scenes are drawn up using these totemic types who, after all, aren’t all that different from the rest of us.

At some point this endeavor will reach a point of reckoning. The author steps back and reads everything that has been written so far. For some reason the drama seems pallid. One suspicion that arises is: “I don’t know these people well enough, because I’m not connecting with them.” Or, “This feels like a kitchen table drama, only with exotic cereal.” The writer can react in numerous ways, and a typical pick for fledgling writers is to inject more suspense. A burning issue is inserted in order to raise the level of passion.

That fork in the road might very well produce handsome results. More often, however, it leads to a muddle. Research gets in the way of a thriller-like pace, as does all the pleasant exchanges among villagers that explicate how they are exotic. Moreover, the aims of the two novelistic pursuits are at odds. One will have to be deemphasized to advance the other.

Beyond these story concerns lies the real answer. The author must still cultivate a core cast of main characters. That’s when the magic of the reader’s involvement happens, and it is the only way to sustain the reader’s interest all the way through the book. The writer must imbibe all those cultural trappings so deeply that they form the way his main characters think.

Exercise: Facts gain more sway when they are personalized. Rather than regarding an aspect of culture as dressing for a scene, consider whether it could be internalized by a main character. Take a dream catcher, for a very basic example: what if the heroine was obsessed with a myth about them? That’s the only way they’ll rise above an object placed on a shelf.

“What we find exotic abroad may be what we hunger for in vain at home.”
―Alain de Botton

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


The Looping Thread

In a memoir, the foremost conundrum many authors face is the scope of the work. An interesting life can be likened to a wide-ranging tale, taking place over a period of decades. Although the events when told individually can be fascinating, the way they are lined up can make the narrative as a whole feel disorganized. It can seem like a collection of greatest hits from a career.

The main reason is chronology. Organizing a book strictly by dates poses difficulties because any person’s life is filled with so many disparate incidents. While your life may be extraordinary, that does not mean that the book will move readers. You need to provide more guidance along the way that informs the reader why you have chosen to relate such incidents.

A useful analogy is a thread running through a sewing machine. It has to be wound up, back, around, looping around this post, through that eyehole, etc., in a crazy configuration that requires a manual to follow. A reader can regard a memoir the same way. A given chapter might jump from a hiking incident to a spiritual subject and then onto a topic such as local politics. When chapters are organized in this fashion, it is easy for the reader to lose the logic of the narrative thread. What the heck did the one have to do with the next?

Start by regarding every chapter as a story unit. It has a beginning, middle, and end. It contains an opening topic paragraph, thematic bridges between each section, and a concluding paragraph. Before starting a chapter, ask yourself: what would the topic paragraph be? Through this process you will find two valuable components to any chapter: which incidents belong together, plus the thematic material that links them.

Then you can group like with like. A dramatic rescue might be linked with one that happens several years later. You don’t want to bend chronology too far, but remember, readers want to go where you are leading them. If you provide thematic material that bridges two incidents, the gap in timing is less important. Related to this technique is what might be called cause and effect. In this case, a hiking incident might be followed by a spiritual message that relates to the hiking incident. With such chapters, asking yourself what the topic paragraph is becomes straightforward. You set up a precipitating incident that then is resolved. You start off a chapter knowing that the middle will lead to the end.

Exercise: As you learned in English class long ago, a topic paragraph consists of a series of sentences that summarize the material that will be covered in a chapter (or, a paper, back in those days). Review your scenes and summarize their import in a single sentence. Put each one down on a list. Then you can review the list and pick out which incidents belong together.

“A great deal of talent is lost to the world for want of a little courage.”
—Sidney Smith

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


In or About

When is a narrative summary sufficient to relay information from a character’s past, and when should a flashback be employed? The question turns to some degree on the sort of novel you are writing. In a literary work, plotting tends to be less linear. In a genre novel, by contrast, the forward momentum of the main plot contributes far more to the entertainment value of the story. Since a flashback itself is a plot element, it stands to reason that the more of them you have, the less forward momentum you generate in the present-day plot.

However, as in so many other considerations in writing, narrative summary may not be the best vehicle for conveying all past plot events. That’s because the summary by its very nature is more distant storytelling. It also, because it sketches the reactions of the characters involved, can verge into telling, not showing, what they are like. Put that way, you can see why talking about characters is less effective than putting them into an active scene to show what they’re like.

How do you determine which device to use? Several parameters can be considered. The first is length of a flashback. If you are worried that they will slow up the main story too much, can you relate a key moment from a character’s past without unspooling an entire scene? For instance, a half page isn’t long; many narrative summaries run that length. Could you construct a series of flashbacks that involve the same time period, place, or key characters? That way you wouldn’t need to set up the circumstances each time. Merely by cueing the reader with a lead sentence—oh, right, that crucial semester freshman year—you could tell a number of shorter snippets, maybe with past events connected to each other.

The second guideline is: importance of the event to the present-day character. The more impact a past event has, the more you should lean toward covering it in a live scene. That plunges the reader directly into the circumstances that affected the character so powerfully—making them hit the reader head-on. Again, a full-length scene can be broken up into sequential pieces, like a mystery lure in which you find out the full truth piece by piece.

The last consideration is: where is it in the book? You usually will provide the background setup for characters within the first third. That is where narrative summary can most easily fall into the error of telling about characters rather than showing—because the reader doesn’t know them very well and that info has to be filled in. When you’re in this part of the book, a full-length flashback or even a couple is not going to slow down a plot that hasn’t yet revved up that much momentum anyway. It also forces you to be strategic: how can you devise a scene that shows as much as possible what the character is like?

“Some memories are realities, and are better than anything that can ever happen to one again.”
—Willa Cather

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Head of a Pin

One task that besets a debut author is: how can I make my novel different? Writing outstanding characters is hard work, developed over the course of long hours of trial and error. Devising a devilishly twisty plot requires its own load of head scratching, figuring how to plan what chess piece moves when. Writing clear descriptions provides an outlet for those gifted in creating word pictures. If, after all these avenues are tried and found wanting, for lack of the author’s time and/or skill, how can the book be given its own flavor?

For the deep thinkers among us, the answer is to give the lead character a philosophy in life. This attempt is different from writing from inside the head of a character, because the narrative style still remains more distant. Rather, the character, while still engaged in the book’s main plot, pursues detours that prompt more profound opinions.

I have no objection to philosophy in novels. One of my favorite authors is Thomas Mann, and one of my favorite characters is Pierre Bezukhov of War and Peace. Who can ever forget his musings during the Battle of Borodino? When I think of it, I still believe Tolstoy’s theory of history—from the bottom up—is correct.

Attempting such a difficult course, however, is rarely a good idea for a debut novelist. The main reason is the context in which such thoughts are placed. Most beginning writers are just trying to get an entertaining story down on paper. They wrestle with how to make the protagonist interesting. They advance the plot via steps that seem to fit the overall design, even when the characters make it go in unexpected directions. These are practical, and usually low-level, decisions. Harriet is determined to leave her old life behind . . . and so she attracts madcap Dennis . . . and she’ll kill the mobster Guido by mistake . . . oh, and I want to reflect on how a variant of the Mob has existed throughout history.

Therein lies the problem. The fledgling author is juggling different imperatives. Character and plot are extremely important, so they have to be tackled. Philosophy, on the other hand, means to tell us how a life is lived. That’s deep and all-pervasive. Occasional ruminations prompted by plot events, or places the character happens to be, can sound like armchair quarterbacking. Worse, they can slow down a book that otherwise seems pretty gripping. You might be better off letting us judge your character by what she can do.

Exercise: If you have pieces of philosophy scattered among the manuscript, take a look at each of them in isolation. What is each one saying? Can you think of a way that your lead character could carry out that piece of philosophy in action? Can you make the plot events line up so they show the different facets of the life problem that must be resolved?

“There is but one truly serious philosophical problem, and that is suicide.”
—Albert Camus

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Only What Sparkles

How do you make large-scales cuts in a nonfiction manuscript? Let's use an example a memoir I edited to demonstrate several tools that you may find useful. The manuscript tells of growing up on a Midwestern farm in a bygone era. The author, knowing that mid-century techniques in agriculture are as foreign to modern-day city dwellers as aquatic life on Mars, listed such practices as seeding, cultivating, and threshing crops as well as farm animals and related topics such as a rural schoolhouse. All of these topics had nuggets of intriguing information, but in the aggregate the manuscript ran to 600 double-spaced pages. A quick check on Amazon showed me that most similar books are barely 300 pages long—or about 400 double-spaced pages. I know that’s about as much as I would want to read.

How do you cut 200 pages? That’s a third of the book. The first place to look is: what are you offering that’s new? In other words, it’s easy to get caught up in cataloguing everything you know about a subject. How much of that information, though, is common knowledge? For instance, the farm memoirist engages my interest when he tells how to collect eggs in a bucket without breaking them, but when he spends several pages on wooden trains, I start yawning. I know all I ever want to know about wooden trains. That’s not unique. You have to regard what you’ve written with a cold eye. Nice that you were involved personally, but are you really telling us something we didn’t know?

A second place to look is: focused writing. If you spend a few pages on a mini tractor that Mom used in the garden, I’ll read it with enjoyment. If you spend a few pages mentioning all of the families you can see from the farm, barely spending a paragraph apiece on each, hardly covering more than their names, what earthly good will that do the reader? The art of storytelling governs the level of interest in nonfiction as well as fiction. If you take the time to delve into details that we can grab onto, we’ll want to find out what happened. If you’re rolling out a list, merely for the sake of pointing out facts, our eyes are going to glaze over. We want the stuff that sparkles in your account. Luckily, that’s easy for you to find. It is the material that you yourself find intriguing.

“The writer who cannot sometimes throw away a thought about which another man would have written dissertations, without worry whether or not the reader will find it, will never become a great writer.”
—Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

Copyright 2019, John Paine


Watching and Waiting

Most novelists realize the importance of keeping the protagonist continually in front of the reader. Since most novels are written in the third-person narrative voice, the danger of your star disappearing among the multitude of characters and plots requires deft planning. Having the lead appear every other chapter might be considered a minimum of the attention that needs to be paid.

Since the main plot revolves around the main character, he will take control of the novel after a certain point. Yet a plot takes awhile to develop, and in the early going its urgency is not as compelling. As the different sides, both good and evil, raise their stakes, an author may be forgiven for deeming this beginning segment an ideal time to make the character truly unique.

Yet the push and pull between character and plot is not easy to control. If a subsidiary character needs to establish a plot stake, in order for the protagonist to later react to it, that supporting character is doing something interesting. Killing someone the star cares for is a common early ploy. What, however, is the star doing in her next chapter that can command equal attention from the reader?

This problem becomes more pronounced when a plot line is wholly divorced from the protagonist’s. Any novel requiring the hero to take a journey will likely contain such a plot. What if the reader becomes more interested in the plot gaining steam in Shanghai as opposed to the star’s roosting grounds in San Francisco?

An additional complication is the well-known fact that evil acts are more interesting than those of the good. The malefactor may dazzle to such an extent early on that the reader longs for his return, even after the hero is seen to make progress. This places your protagonist in the awkward role of trying to wrest control of her own novel from a character who clearly deserves to be punished.

Unless you are writing a literary novel, the only solution is giving the lead character the best thought-out plot planning. Let’s say the hero, in order to establish his character, learns early on his sister was abused by her husband. The steps he takes to rectify the situation determines how interested the reader will be. If, for example, in the scene right after the villain commits a murder, the hero confronts the husband, I’ll be interested in seeing the repercussions. If, on the other hand, the scene consists of the hero’s wringing his hands at his kitchen table, I’ll award the point to the villain. You’re in charge. Make sure your plotting matches your desire for a deeper portrayal.

Exercise: You can chart the developments of your different plot lines. Review each scene and write a 1-2 sentence description of the plot advance that was achieved. Look for corresponding weights. A murder, for example, requires a major counterbalance. A villain’s threat, on the other hand, might be answered by the hero’s hand wringing.

“Life is nothing but a competition to be the criminal rather than the victim.”
—Bertrand Russell

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


From Inert to Propulsive

Everyone knows you need active verbs in your prose. The new take I have to offer is where to find these verbs within your present text. When I am line editing, I often grab words used as other parts of speech in a sentence and convert them into verbs. I am surprised, in fact, by how often a fine active verb is waiting right there to be plucked.

All writers face the same problem. Readers must traverse your written page, and you need vehicles that transport them forward. If a sentence is not propelled forward by a verb, all your brilliant word choices otherwise might as well be gilded bowling pins. They will stand like posts, inert, waiting for the electric clap of movement.

The most common obstacle to good writing is passive sentence construction. If a sentence starts with “There is” or “It is,” you immediately need to take a second look at it. The usage stems from the way we talk, because it serves as a way to lead into a new topic.

One useful trick is to look for the most distinctive word in a passive sentence. It can be a noun, adjective, or adverb. One common culprit is a word ending in –tion or –ment. Let’s take: “There is true enjoyment in humming on the way to work.” Simply strip off the suffix and make that the verb. “I have found I truly enjoy humming on the way to work.”

Another simple fix is eliminating the “there is” clause from a sentence and forcing yourself to supply an active verb. For example: “In the search material there is a number of such letters from other women similar to this one.” If the “there is” comes out, “material” must become a noun. Therefore you get: “The search material contains a number of such letters from other women similar to this one.” Such a change entails no profound spurt of creative energy. You’re merely making sure that the sentence is moving forward.

These micro decisions are not earth-shaking. When making each change, you don’t feel like you’ve made much of a difference. Yet in the aggregate, adding up dozens or even hundreds of such changes, you’ve ensured all those times that the reader makes progress in your narrative. So they appreciate all the more when you produce that metaphor or dazzling turn of phrase. They've come to expect it of such a careful writer.

Exercise: You should be on the constant lookout for the combination of “it is” and “that” in a sentence. For example: “It was at that moment that Lorraine realized she was in this all alone.” Cut out the three extra words and you get: “At that moment Lorraine realized she was in this all alone.” You’ve not only made the sentence more active, you’ve pruned extra verbiage as well.

“I believe more in the scissors than I do in the pencil.”
—Truman Capote

Copyright @ 2019 John Paine


Am I Really With You?

I was writing the other day about nonfiction writers getting carried away, and one of the reasons is using the word “we” too often. I’d like to explore that topic further, from the standpoint of a reader who might not want to be included in the author’s gang. I paid money for the book, right? It ‘s supposed to help me. I didn’t sign up to become part of a tribe.

The tactic originated as part of making speeches, I’m sure. When you’re up at a podium, you’re trying to sell an audience on your ideas. Your fervor will carry the day, and one way to win over the masses is including them as part of the cause, making them feel they are participating. This process can be likened to a school pep rally—for adults who should know better than to fork over an outrageous sum to attend the event.

In a book, this form of exhortation has a useful purpose. It makes the topics being discussed more immediate to the reader. Any book will cover a wide range of subjects, and a portion of them are universal. In a book about buying a house, we should all understand the importance of points when refinancing a mortgage. We all should know that Zillow derives an individual house’s price from the sales of houses in its neighborhood. “We” are truly all together when the topics cover all readers.

Authors make their mistake when they extend this nice effort to include people into areas that are specialized. If we are talking about real estate in Arizona, and I live in Massachusetts, I’m not part of the “we” that discusses the importance of water rights. It’s annoying for me to be roped into a discussion that is of remote interest at best. Worse, it distances such a reader from the book in general, because now I’m aware the author is just making a pitch.

This is a reason why examples are useful. If the author got out of their lazy armchair, where “we” is so easy and cozy, and delivers an example of the Fosters, who live in Tucson and found their stream poisoned by a new development, the reader now can participate in another fashion. I know this could happen to me, in another guise, since developers are universally unscrupulous. But I don’t feel irritated that I have only a vague idea what an arroyo is.

Exercise: Do a universal search of the word “we” in your manuscript. When you find each one, check the context in which it is being used. If you are making a claim that truly does embrace all of your readers, you can leave it alone. If you are addressing only a sector of the audience, see if you can replace it with language that acknowledges that portion of readers that are bystanders.

“Who cares about the clouds when we're together? Just sing a song and bring the sunny weather.”
—Dale Evans

Copyright @ 2019 John Paine


Idiom or Cliché?

We use clichés all the time when we’re speaking. They are a form of shorthand for an idea that might need to be explained. Anyone knows what “the ball is in your court” means, even if they don’t play tennis. Clichés can also be used as humor, since the idea that a cliché conveys can be used as a clever association or an ironic counterpart. In other words, the reason that clichés persist, despite our common scorn, is because they are useful.

Unfortunately, they can also be a lazy form of writing. I see them often employed in manuscripts that are written in haste. You are writing, trying to get ideas out, and a cliché springs to mind. They are easy to grab, mentally, and they may very well convey what you mean. Depending on the writer, they may actually be more succinctly phrased than the surrounding material. Their kernel-like clarity is why they were retained in common speech originally.

Yet a cliché is also a borrowed piece of text. To me, that is the greatest sin. If you look at the quotation that ends this post, you’ll see exactly what I mean. You are trying to express yourself. You and no one else. You know about all those other books on all those shelves, and you are carving out a new legacy. So why would you want to clutter up your prose with the ideas of someone else?

One other factor to consider is the fatigue a reader experiences. The weariness felt from encountering the familiar enervates your prose. The reader experiences a subtle reaction: oh, a cliché. That’s sort of boring. You add up enough of them, and the reader comes to feel that your book isn’t special or original at all. You’re always taking shortcuts.

Before this becomes a blanket condemnation, the way you expected an editor would go, we should return to the idea of idioms used in speech. You do want your dialogue to be natural, and people do use clichés a lot. If you were to turn a common phrase into some tortured construction just to avoid using a cliché, it would sound artificial. If you are selective enough, a cliché will subside in usage to its proper place: a minor, idiomatic tool in your arsenal.

Exercise: Comb your latest draft for clichés. Where are they being used? Unless the point of view voice is so chatty that the narrative seems but an extension of dialogue, you might want to limit them to dialogue. Even then, could one character be more given to using them? How about someone very smart but so unoriginal that their intelligence only extends to spouting a wider variety of clichés?

“Originality does not consist in saying what no one has ever said before, but in saying exactly what you think yourself.”
—James F. Stephan

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine



The author of many a business book is a huckster. That is not meant as a smear, necessarily. The art of cajoling a customer to think a certain way is as old as the U.S. of A. The days of quacks and nostrums and snake oil have long passed, but the replacements rely on the seller adopting the same ruses. Persuasion remains a mixture of conviction and logic twisted to make the sale.

What all business writers have in common is that they read other business books. An editor in the field will see the same terms used over and over. Part of the reason is the desire to speak the reader’s language. Partly, the author desires to ensure the reader’s comfort by referencing well-known business authors (“how do you go from good to great?”) The main cause, though, is laziness, an idea spouted off the top of the head and channeled through a funnel larded with buzz words.

Caution needs to be observed for several reasons. The first is that, in trying to get over on the reader, an author can be carried away by the hectoring style. The keys get pounded, and short paragraph after short paragraph burst forth. The words “we” or “you” become the subject of every sentence. Come on, you know I’m right! is the gist of this style. What may be left out of such a torrent is any substance. The author gets so carried away, they forget to build the backing behind the assertion. The reader’s eyes glaze over, because we have read this sort of stuff so many times.

That ties in with the second danger: repetition. When conversing on a topic, there are only so many variants when you are writing material that is not grounded by specifics. This method of making grand claims is similar to the bullshitting you did on college papers when you had to stretch one page of substance to the required five pages. But guess what? Readers are not being paid to read it; they put the book in the webbing of a plane seat, never to be retrieved again.

Making general points, even in a sloganeering way, is fine for a first draft. You do need to set down the general parameters you want to explore. You are being sabotaged by your own ego, however, if you think that is good enough. If you read Good to Great, you know it is crammed full of statistics. That’s why it’s a great book, not because Jim Collins can deliver a good line of cant.

Exercise: During your review, mark all the places in the manuscript where you make a sweeping statement without following with an interesting fact. That’s your job in the second draft: hunting and gathering an passel of material that no other business book has. The latest stats by the Department of Labor suffices as just one example. See if you can do better than the empty college paper written as a callow youth.

“Our major obligation is not to mistake slogans for solutions.”
—Edward R. Murrow

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


The Meaning of Sweep

A nonfiction book that features a series of stories tied together by a central theme has a similar structure to a collection of essays. A typical format features a story per chapter, and the chapter length is determined by how many interesting facets the subject has. Since the subjects can be disparate, an author has a harder time answering a major question a publisher has: what is the book’s narrative arc?

A writer can try to include thematic statements throughout the chapters. Let’s say the overall topic of the book is: entrepreneurs who never finished school. The book contains such fascinating examples as Steve Jobs and Richard Branson. The chapters follow the same basic format: a chronology of their chafing in school, their early struggles, and on to the glorious success that gains them inclusion in the book. All along the way, the ties that bind are sprinkled in. If the author is clever, the personages can be arranged from lower to most famous, thus describing a rising arc.

One of the problems with this approach is repetition. The author is so conscious of the book’s overriding theme that it is pounded into the reader’s head in all the various forms that the author can invent to hide the fact it’s the same thing. In the previous example, that might be: rebellion against conformity is a hallmark of genius. It’s a nice thought on page 2; it’s a migraine headache by page 222.

Another is the wear and tear of having to learn the setup each new time. Everybody’s life takes different turns, and so the particulars need to be included in order for the reader to understand the obstacles that are overcome. The problem here is discontinuity. In effect, we are introduced to a new stranger in each chapter, and after a while, meeting so many new people can become numbing. Imagine reader with chin propped up by hand, thinking: His father was a deadbeat dad too, huh?

One factor that also has a tendency to creep up on the reader after a while is negativity. Usually in such books there is an overarching villain. In the above example, it is the education system. Negative comments about any subject cast a pall over the whole, and they become tiresome in the long run. Yes, school failed that one guy, but how about all of the Harvard Ph.D.’s who run the world?

Exercise: The only remedy is reducing the silo nature of the chapters. If you can pick stories that are similar, these can be grouped in a part (Part 1, Part 2, etc.). That gives you the ability to pick themes that are more limited. More important, it allows you to turn to new themes later on, making the book’s turns more fresh to the reader overall. You have the introduction and epilogue to tie everything together, anyway.

“We live entirely, especially if we are writers, by the imposition of a narrative line upon disparate images, by the 'ideas' with which we have learned to freeze the shifting phantasmagoria which is our actual experience.”
—Joan Didion

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Paying Paul

Amid the ebullience of finishing a novel, after a seemingly endless number of drafts, an author can become caught up in the idea of writing a sequel. They may have been told that the key ingredient is carrying the central core of cast members over to the new book. High among them, maybe the #2 character, is the villain. Wouldn’t it be nice . . . ? thinks the author.

The factors arguing for a resumed battle between protagonist and antagonist are pretty clear. You have built up the villain into a memorable character, allotting almost as much space as to the hero. In addition, in order to drive the book’s suspense, the two characters may have operated in separate spheres, as heroes often spend the entire book trying to identify and then locate the villain. So now that the villain is a known quantity, they could spend the entire book feinting and counter-feinting, just a barrel full of monkeys to spring on the reader. Best of all, you know both of them so well, the second book will nearly write itself.

While there are certainly series in which an overarching villain is continued from book to book, they usually are not the heavies in any one of those books. Instead, it is the kingpin’s henchman who gets down in the trenches and dukes it out with the hero. That arrangement seems to indicate that the reader is getting gypped, but that’s not true.

The reason why is: coverage. The person who keeps showing up is the one whom the reader will learn to hate. That is one of the governing principles of story logic. You control which characters will induce emotion from the reader. Aunt Millie might be a terrifying ax murderer, but if she rarely appears in the book’s pages, we’re not going to pay her much attention.

Now let’s consider the question in terms of math. Say you have allotted, out of a 400-page manuscript, 200 pages to the hero’s scenes and 125 pages to the villain’s.  By a simple number count, you can see that more than three-quarters of the book has been devoted to one or the other. If the hero is to match up with a titanic foe—needed for a thrilling climax—are you going to feature some also-ran from the other 75 pages? No. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. You can’t save the primary villain for the next book, because that is the only struggle that will satisfy readers of the first book.

Exercise: Series writers commonly use the same types over and over. Examine the scenes in which your villain appears. Write down notes pertaining to physical descriptions, type of personality, and background. Now imagine that same person in your sequel, only strip out the descriptions and background. Replace those elements with new ones. You have a new villain.

“The more successful the villain, the more successful the picture.”
—Alfred Hitchcock

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


In Absentia

One of the obstacles that many authors attempting to write a mystery face is their lack of knowledge of law enforcement procedures. That stops them from making the most logical choice for a protagonist: a detective. Instead, they write about a “civilian,” in police parlance, who is driven to uncover clues, usually apart from or in opposition to the detectives assigned to the case. Maintaining that drive despite encountering factors that would make most people decide they are in over their head is one of the necessary tricks that must be accomplished.

What happens when the civilian decides not to investigate, in any formal sense? The cops do their job, but the civilian employs other resources to provide valuable knowledge. To me, this approach is two steps removed: not a cop and not a civilian investigating clues or suspects. An armchair quarterback, in less kind terms.

Leaving aside the question of whether such a novel can be considered a mystery, I’ll point out the main difficulty of this remote approach. What does the protagonist bring to the drama? Solving the crime is a plot pursuit. If the main character is doing that in a by-the-way fashion, what other business is occupying most of their time? Let’s turn the prism slightly and ask: is what they’re doing as interesting as solving the crime?

One reason that mysteries are so popular is because death is a powerful lure in fiction. The reasons for killing are fun for readers to uncover. If your protagonist has a hands-off approach, they must have a plot line with its own overarching end point that pulls readers along. Falling in love is one obvious example. Love is second only to death in terms of attracting a reading audience.

Depending on the strength of this plot line, you now face another issue. Why should the reader care about the murder case, since the lead actor in that plot line is a secondary character. Do I feel the same satisfaction when Detective Wilson turns up a clue? A secondary character doesn’t show up as often as the protagonist, and so my allegiance is that much more removed. I may even have a jaundiced view of the detective, since many readers don’t like cops much in real life.

The worse option is that the protagonist’s plot line is not as interesting. Since many writers regard themselves as utterly fascinating creatures, they make the mistake of thinking readers will feel the same. Too much high tea in suburbia, and you may induce the sleep of the dead. 

Exercise: At the outset of the project, ask yourself if you really want to write a mystery. If you do, get out of your armchair and do the work needed to acquire knowledge of the subject. There are many police officers, etc., who have written extremely useful books about their profession. Ignorance is only an excuse for laziness.

“The past is an old armchair in the attic, the present an ominous ticking sound, and the future is anybody's guess.”
—James Thurber

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Connecting Plot Runs

The transcontinental railroad resembles a novel in that it was built in segments. A stretch of the rails would be completed, and the crew would move on to the next. Because novels take so long for most writers to complete, a stretch can consist of a run of chapters, and you still have a half dozen more stretches to build.

Using the organic method—or making it up as you go along—you can find yourself left with disparate pieces by the time a draft is completed. You may have directed the protagonist to pursue certain plot aims during one stretch and then inserted a subplot later on that has nothing to do with what you wrote earlier. At the time you wrote the subplot, you didn’t really remember that earlier part. You wrote that months ago.

This approach is the opposite of the grand scheme used by experienced authors in genres such as mystery. In those novels every plot point, every character appearance, fits into an intricately connected puzzle. While such a construction can feel formulaic, there is no doubt that the reader feels satisfied by the linkages.

The same process can be reverse-engineered after a draft is completed. You may realize, for instance, that a crime drama has an appealing lead detective who drops out of the book during the last 100 pages. That’s because a court case takes center stage during that stretch. While you were writing the courtroom drama, it seemed so gripping. But in hindsight, looking at all of the parts of the novel in one sweep, you realize that the sacrifice of the character isn’t worth the gain.

All is not lost. A draft is a mutable instrument. You made up the whole story anyway, so you can make up replacement parts. You can write more scenes for the detective, to use that example. Maybe three more scenes, with gaps of 20 pages between scenes. That ensures the character will remain vivid in the reader’s mind until the end.

The more difficult step for many writers is sacrificing their babies. You also need to take out three scenes of the courtroom drama, because even with additional scenes, the detective’s presence still will be overshadowed by the tremendous emphasis, measured in page count, you have placed on winning in court. So you look for procedural matters like an in-camera conference, for witnesses that say in court things the reader already knows, etc. You correct course by being willing to cut that stuff—because you’re now taking the long view.

Exercise: How do you measure proportion? Run a Find search for a major character. You’ll find the name frequently during a certain stretch of pages, so keep looking. When a long gap appears, write down the number of pages in between. How long do they appear in this new section? Keep counting those gaps. Then ask yourself: do I want this character to make more of an impact?

“What art is, in reality, is this missing link, not the links which exist. It's not what you see that is art; art is the gap.”
—Marcel Duchamp

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


A Selling Synopsis

Submitting your manuscript to a literary agent or publisher involves steps that are different from writing a novel. I’ll leave aside the query letter in this post to focus on the synopsis. The length requested is usually a page. That leaves an author with a daunting question: how do I boil down hundreds of pages so succinctly?

My first piece of advice is: don’t worry about reducing the document to a page on your first try. Give yourself latitude to summarize points at a length that feels shrunk down from the book’s text. You can start by reviewing each chapter and jotting down sentences that boil down its action into a few sentences. (No dialogue: you’re way too far in the weeds if you include dialogue.) Through this process you might find you have distilled the material down to 5-10 pages.

Now take a break, preferably overnight or a few days. You want to view the new material after gaining some distance from it. Why? Because distance is what you’re aiming for in an outline. My whole book, in a page. After the respite, now read the outline as though it is its own story. You’re on a higher plane. What do you want to discard this time?

The winnowing process now can sift out items that relate to subplots or happen to minor characters. You don’t have space for all that stuff, even though it might be great material in the full-length book. If you’re having trouble deciding what is integral to the main plot, rank your major characters on a scale of one through five. Anything that happens to a character below #2 is a likely candidate for cuts. As you plow through those 5-10 pages, you’re crossing out lines that will likely bring you down to 2-3 pages. Sleeping on that overnight can provide a valuable break that allows you to approach the final step with fresh eyes.

During your next round, turn your concern to the protagonist. If you concentrate on what happens to the main character, as well as the relationships revolving around that fulcrum, you’ll find that the novel can be reduced to its true bare bones. While a synopsis should be factual in tone, you can follow the arc of the main love interest with a few deft sentences spaced apart on the page. You can outline the major twists and the hero’s/villain’s reactions to them. You may find that you can reduce a paragraph to a single sentence because all you care about is the protagonist. You do that often enough, and you’re down to a page.

Exercise: An outline is all tell, no show. So get that dictum out of your head. Telling allows you to compress text. Telling is also a sign that the author is narrating from a remote distance. Bad for novel writing, but excellent for summaries.

“I try to leave out the parts people skip.”
— Elmore Leonard

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Plucking and Choosing

As a person who worked for years with a sharp pencil, I tend to trust my instincts more than word-processing aids, but that is only a personal preference. Tools such as Find can be a godsend for a careful author. I have a mental clicker that keeps track of common mistakes such as overused words and expressions. Yet an author may have a harder time seeing these. Certain ways of phrasing a sentence may put you in your wheelhouse for expressing a new idea. I totally agree with the basic idea. For example, an author may use “quite” and “rather” qualifiers because they help prompt a sentence that is provocative and interesting. After you’re done, just remember to take out the “quite” or “rather.” You’ll find that everything else still sparkles.

I run the Find function on occasion, when my intuition tells me that too much repetition is at play, and I sometimes have been shocked by the results. I knew characters were doing a certain amount of staring at each other, but 148 times? A person could get eyestrain from that.

You can also run a global search on trickier items of redundancy. One phrase I look for often is “as if” or “as though.” This sort of sentence construction has valuable uses, but when I see it repeatedly, I usually feel that the prose overall is getting snarled in complex sentences. Again, writing depends on how an author thinks. If you naturally compose complex sentences, using “as though” is a natural extension of unspooling a thought. Many readers, especially nowadays, don’t think that way, however. What I tend to do is delete the phrase “as though,” and separate the sentence in two. Most of the time, removing the connecting clause does not require any further editing. But you have removed a tangle.

What I really wish for—if Santa would like to visit the world of computer editing—is a search function that would identify how many participial phrases are used in a manuscript. While I am not an enemy of them, I do know that many such phrases are stronger when they become an independent sentence. But if you try to look up “ing,” you will be frustrated. The suffix is used too often for other purposes. If robots can clean my house, how come they can’t look for a comma followed by a participle?

Exercise: If while reviewing your manuscript, you feel a tic that you’ve seen that usage before, stop. You have, almost for sure. Type the word or phrase into your Find window and see how many times it is used throughout the manuscript. You’ll likely gulp at the number. Then spend a few minutes looking up synonyms. Start jumping through the search and adding fresh vocabulary for each usage.

“I have written—often several times—every word I have ever published.”
—Vladimir Nabokov

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Genres Past

Many a debut author is confused when, after writing a novel, they are asked by a literary agent what its genre is. Their knowledge of genres has been formed most likely by seeing different sections in a bookstore: Fiction, Mystery, Science Fiction, etc. When they consider the question, common answers are: “Can’t it belong in the general fiction category?” or “It is a combination of genres.”

It is heartening that a person writing a novel thinks that books are free from—elevated above, might be the better term—the world of marketing, but that’s not how publishers think. They have marketing departments, and the head of that department may give the decisive nay vote in deciding whether or not to buy a book. That’s because publishers are not writers. They manufacture books that are placed on a shelf, virtual or not. That’s why the question of which shelf is crucial.

A more knowledgeable author may realize to which genre the book belongs. This writer knows that the book is a thriller, say. Yet the marketing questions do not stop there. The next question is: what type of thriller? Is it a military thriller? A legal thriller? A police procedural? Skipping past the author’s further confusion about a more specific label, they must realize the possible stop signs.

That’s because these subgenres go through fads. For example, legal thrillers were all the rage 20 years ago. An author may write that type of book because they enjoyed reading that genre back when it was popular. That doesn’t mean it is now. To an agent, that label is passé. The subgenre may very well come back into fashion, since they do run in cycles. They often are kick-started by a raging best-seller in the subgenre. But do you want to wait until then?

You are better off investigating what is popular now. Unless your book takes place entirely inside a courtroom, to keep using that example, it probably can be called a “crime drama.” You may find that some agents are looking for thrillers featuring a serial murderer—do you have one?

You can also tailor the book to shade it more toward the brand you have adopted. To continue with the legal thriller, could you cut down the number of courtroom scenes and write a few more for the lead detective pursuing the case? The expenditure of a few weeks may result in a product that you can take to the people who want to hear: I know how to sell my book.

Exercise: To find out what is popular, look in the bookstore or on Amazon and see what is selling. Read the blurbs on the back cover of the book and see what a marketing writer thinks will appeal to the reading public. They aren’t subtle. An hour spent sitting on the carpet in front of a bookcase can improve your understanding wonderfully.

“I think of myself as a bad writer with big ideas, but I'd rather be that than a big writer with bad ideas.”
―Michael Moorcock

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Your Y Joints

When a nonfiction writer assembles chapters, the gathered material can be placed within broad groupings. Yet the juxtaposition of two diverse subjects can be jarring. For instance, a history of cataract diagnosis does not logically lead into intracapsular cataract extraction, an older surgical procedure. Often what happens is that an inexperienced author thinks, “Oh, I’ll just put a boldface heading between sections.” And what often happens? You end up with a chapter that has 15-20 headings. Many times a section consists of only a single paragraph, because that’s all the material you have on that topic. The problem is, headings don’t make a chapter’s progress logical by themselves.

The solution to joining up two topics is a paragraph that encompasses both subjects. If you think of your narrative as a journey, you can signal to the reader when you’re about to turn left. If you remember your wooden train tracks as a child, this device could be called a Y section. That’s because the best junction is a transition paragraph between the topics.

The key is to find an overarching idea that includes both of the topics. For instance, the first sentence of the Y paragraph might summarize your section on cataract diagnosis. The second sentence might draw back the “camera lens” to tell the reader that finally ophthalmologists discovered a way to do something about what they were observing. A third sentence might describe the cataract film (diagnosis) and how it might be shattered (surgery). The final sentence might then introduce the idea of intracapsular cataract extraction. Now you’re on a new topic, and it all happened in one natural flow. 

You can do the same with two headings that are close to each other. Expand the first heading into a complete sentence. Now do the same for the second heading. Those become the first and last sentences in your Y paragraph. Now write a few sentences that will bridge the first and last sentences, and voilà—the headings disappear.

Exercise: Pick out a chapter and look for boldface subheadings. You should shoot for only five or so sections per chapter. How much material follows a heading? A paragraph? Two paragraphs? You should shoot for two pages, minimum, for a section. That will discipline you to create larger sections.

“Pay no attention to what the critics say; there has never been set up a statue in honor of a critic.” 
—Jean Sibelius

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


A Step Deeper

Authors don’t think in terms of stuffing their novel full of details, but that is the end result. Descriptions set the stage in different scenes. Background information, short and long, enhance characterization. Given the multiplicity of scenes and characters, all those details add up. More important, the quality of the details can create larger flows that either sharpen or dull the overall reading experience.

How do you make sure, amid the sheer volume of details, that your reader stays alert? A favorite word of mine is the often misspelled “pique,” as in piquing someone’s interest. What stimulates a reader? In my experience it is complexity. For instance, a complex character holds the reader’s interest more than a cardboard cutout. When applied to a detail, this multilayered approach derives from how long an author stays on that one point.

Let’s look at a single example to see how this process works. Imagine a corporate lobby in a city skyscraper that is filled with Frank Stella sculptures. Anyone who knows Stella immediately thinks of garish colors and weirdly cut pieces superimposed on each other. Okay, you could write that. That does describe his artwork. But let’s dig deeper.

How does a character walking into that lobby feel? The first thought might be about the corporation that picked the art. Is it trying to make a statement about how sophisticated it is? Or the thought might be directed at why interesting art was placed in such a sterile setting, with all the smartly dressed people rushing in a timely fashion. The artwork might be perceived as intimidating, since the character is nervous about what awaits on the 14th floor above. In all of these cases the physical appearance of the object is given a sub-layer of a character’s reactions to the object.

A more difficult feat is using a metaphor to describe an object. George Orwell’s comment “Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket” makes no pretense of literal accuracy. Instead, a detail is likened to another idea that describes it obliquely. These parallels, if truly apt, are famously the best ones of all.

What matters is how much time an author spends revolving the concept, turning it this way and that to gauge how to reveal its essence. Even a more pedestrian “The faded billboards indicated the fortunes of the town” still has the ability to make a reader stop for a click to consider the deeper meaning. When you fill up an entire manuscript with riches created by your trying harder, you don’t have to wonder why readers remember it.

Exercise: Review the manuscript looking only for descriptions. Have you put enough time into making each one stand out, even if only a little? A “dingy” white picket fence tells the reader more than just a “white picket fence.” When you add details that indicate personality, the reader benefits from what you infer.

“A hospital bed is a parked taxi with the meter running.”
—Groucho Marx

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Prattling On

Whatever character or plot decisions that are made during the course of writing a novel, an author can always count on the fact that the story will be filled with details. These can be personal, which emerge frequently in dialogue-driven stories. They can be descriptive for those who are either clear-sighted or given to metaphors. Yet the very profusion of possibilities raises a question: how do you recognize which details should be included?

In this post I’ll cover dialogue, since that constitutes more than half the text of most commercial novels. When does the natural flow of words—sounding right to the ear—spill over into nattering? Any writer knows that, especially on a day when you’re tired, entire pages can be spun out of a conversation between two characters. Such practice echoes real life. Just think of your average phone call to your mother. Does anyone escape without talking about minutia for at least twenty minutes?

Let’s stop right there for a moment. From such a phone call you already know what was wheat and what was chaff. You called your mother for a specific reason, say to check on Thanksgiving arrangements. You didn’t need to learn about her latest stomach ailment, or what that nasty Nancy Ross at the theater said to her, or the fact that your stepfather will be carving the turkey, the way he does every year. You knew, going in to the call, that you would endure nineteen minutes of an older person needing to talk in order to gain the one minute that will determine your plans in late November.

When you review your dialogue passages, you can use the same filter. Start off by asking: what am I trying to accomplish during this conversation? How will the words spoken advance either the plot or your characterization? You do want a natural flow, because otherwise the dialogue will be stilted. Yet how much, really, is needed to set that base?

One handy tool is employing narrative summary as bridges during dialogue. If the natural flow starts to yammer, you can end the quoted material and condense the filler to a sentence or two. The narrative portion moves the reader from topic A to topic B without expending all the time it takes for a conversation to naturally bend in that direction. An example might be: “They kept on exchanging pleasantries until Gilbert got around to what he really wanted to say.” Then you jump to the next good part.

Exercise: One tactic that works less well is indirect quotes. While this sort of work can compress text material, it also can come to feel like remote-control storytelling. Are they talking or aren’t they? If you feel you should summarize, try for a single sentence in length to do that job. That’s the level of an executive summary, not a secondhand, passive narrative.

“Great people talk about ideas, average people talk about themselves, and small people talk about others.”
― John C. Maxwell

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


The Forces Without

Political discourse these days is filled with charges of tribalism, as though our citizens have degenerated from some golden era of inclusion. But of course, as any publishing professional could tell you, Americans have always been xenophobic. That’s why the overwhelming majority of novels feature American characters engaged in strife right here in the U.S.A.

This favoritism can lead authors to think that in order to claim new ground in their books, they must venture overseas and bring back knowledge gleaned from other lands. Most of these forays end up in Europe, and the novels that are successful tend to take place in lands using Romance languages—or, places with values common to the U.S. Try to set it in Poland, though, or Romania, and you run into a common buzzsaw: quirky, but not like us. Russia is the exception in this realm, but only because their foreign ways align with our perception of evil ways.

This desire to feature the exotic goes much further in foreign-based historical novels. The pedagogic impulse in this genre is doubled by having to explain the archaic mores of people who don’t share our traditions. This is why, I think, the genre of fantasy has such appeal. If you convert foreigners into actual elves and dwarves, that helps explain why they do such queer things as slurp loudly and chop wooden blocks.

The exception to our prejudice is a novel set in Britain, with British characters. That’s because we share a common heritage with our fierce-faced overseas brethren. Plus, they speak the right language, even if wrongly. It’s close enough that the reader can feel caught up in the events and root for the right folks.

Writers hoping for commercial success can venture wherever they like, but they are advised to include at least one American among the top three players, preferably the protagonist. Allied with that character had better be another American, or a foreign analogue. That is, a wisecracking, hard-bitten companion who offsets the enthusiasm that most heroes possess in order to drive a plot forward.

That core cast then become a filter for information the author wishes to impart to readers. Interesting oddities, yes, but viewed as an American bumbling through the jungle would judge them. Through the lens of a perpetual teenager seeking a place to belong in our land.

Exercise: If you have already written a partial or full draft of a novel featuring solely foreigners, look at the core cast to see if any of your major characters could be converted into either a citizen of the U.S. or U.K. The choice is usually the character toward which you feel the most warmth. During the run-through of the next draft, tailor their mannerisms and speech to create a familiar spearhead into the alien world you wish to show the reader.

“One of the most difficult things for any artist to do is create a world that looks both completely alien yet real and possible.”
—Jim Lee

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine



In the course of writing a long manuscript, an author can be pardoned for occasionally going back to the same well. A number of times the same or similar choice reflects the writer’s bent, or outlook on such matters. We try to be consistent in our everyday routines, so why not within the pages of a book?

In fiction, variety is the spice of life. That’s because a reader doesn’t want to have the same experiences, but a constantly unfolding series of new ones. Reading the same stuff over and over is boring, no matter how exciting the event. If Bilbo in The Hobbit, for instance, disappeared the same way time after time, he would lose that ingenuous quality that makes him so endearing.

One plot event in particular can start to feel the same: a murder in a mystery novel. When the killer’s M.O. is established, such as slashing a person’s neck, the investigating characters have to go through the same procedure with the corpses. Same smell in the cold morgue, same wisecracks from the medical examiner about chickens, etc. Even a second murder committed the same way can have a reader reaching for the sleeping pills.

What a waste. A murder is such a terrific tool for an author. If a book-opening murder is followed shortly by a second one, which is a tried-and-true method, why do the slayings have to be alike? Most killers are not trained assassins, which affords an author the chance for experimentation. This time when the murderous urge came on . . . If you are really clever, the second murder can be committed by someone else entirely.

If the murders do have to be similar, as in a serial murder case, you have to devise how to vary other aspects of the crimes. You can plot out how the conclusions that the investigators draw from each one are different. You can go the sequential route, in which each murder adds something else to the knowledge a detective has about the killer. Any aspects of a crime scene that have been covered in an earlier scene, skim over that stuff with passing remarks.

Drawing differences is easier when personalities are more flamboyant. Realistically, good detectives are predictable, but those aren’t the ones readers like. The one that can take a counterintuitive approach poses a puzzle to a reader: how can that inference be supported? If you think about it, that was Sherlock Holmes’s “method”: keep Dr. Watson guessing about his inscrutable remarks. Why should you settle for any less?

Exercise: Because similar scenes can be separated by numerous pages, you may not be aware of your tics. You can be more exacting. Separate out those scenes and read them in isolation, back-to-back (-to-back). What do you spot is similar? While you’re changing those out, keep asking yourself: could this new element play a long-range role in the developing mystery?

“The essence of the beautiful is unity in variety.”
—W. Somerset Maugham

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Be Careful What You Want

When the reason for writing a novel is to relive old times, an author is warned that fiction has demands that go beyond spinning fine yarns. Such a project usually begins with vignettes that are droll or interesting because of the unusual circumstances of an occupation. These pieces can run three or four or five pages. The collection of them grows over time until some critical mass of pages is achieved in the author’s mind. Maybe 100 pages, or 200? The length is starting to resemble the length of novels they’ve read—or at least seen in venues such as the airport Hudson News stands.

When the budding author asks around about how to go about pull their collection together into a real novel, a common piece of advice is to hire an editor. I have called upon occasionally in these situations, and I dispense roughly the same advice.

The first is to look beyond the individual scenes and seize upon a thread that will run all the way to the end of the book. What is the end goal for the main character (usually the author thinly disguised)? How can the scenes be lined up in service of that goal? More important, what scenes have nothing to do with that goal? This is the tricky part, because many authors don’t like to discard what they’ve already written. But if you’re writing about a major swindle on the rodeo circuit, some of the dozen scenes you’ve written about, say, obstreperous broncos may have to be axed. How many times will a reader read about someone being dumped before thinking, “Isn’t this like the last bucking bronco scene I read?”

The next vital consideration is the longevity of your characters. “Long” in this case refers to how long they last in the novel. If plucky Jane appears in two scenes and you have 40 of them, her quirks will be drowned among the plethora of other personalities. Such a cameo appearance also hampers the process of readers identifying with her. If she is to be used in any weighty plot business, such as being murdered, the catharsis you gain revolves around how much readers care about the character.

Attention to creating a circle of major characters can also limit the feeling of listlessness that comes over a reader while reading an episodic novel. In too many scenes a new character appears, and readers don’t know how they fit into the main plot. Even characters who reappear occasionally don’t help, because they’ve been gone so long, they obviously don’t matter. Real life may be stranger than fiction, but for the most part, it’s merely more scattered.

Exercise: When examining characters in disparate scenes, see if you can gang them up into a single character. You know that you are writing about a half dozen different cowboys, for example, but couldn’t they be combined in one Cowboy? Better yet, you can pick the most colorful of the lot, and use that person repeatedly.

“Goals transform a random walk into a chase."
—Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


A Different Walk of Life

If your long career has recently ended in retirement, you may have the desire to write a book about your experiences, but you don’t know how to get started. The difference between writing business reports and a full-length book can seem enormous. So today’s post has a few commonsense guidelines designed to help translate wishes into horses.

The first is to realize that writing does not operate on an eight-hour work cycle. Sure, a novelist like Joseph Conrad had his wife lock him in his study every morning and afternoon, but Conrad also happens to be one of the greatest writers of all time. For your purposes, I would advise a less lofty goal. Start off by choosing a one-hour block at a set time. That seems more manageable, doesn’t it? The key is to pick the same hour-long block every day, in the same location. If you don’t shoot for every day, you won’t develop the right writing muscles, and eventually the project will drift off again into dreamland. If you can go longer than an hour on an inspired day, that’s a bonus.

Second, don’t try to write the book in order. Organization is a major reason that neophyte writers fear such a long project. Or, even if you get started, a major reason that you stumble coming out of the gate. Forget about everything you learned at the office. A book has so many pieces that you can spend hours at a time on any single one of them. So why are you worried about the whole before you have anything to put in order?

Instead, start off by picking the low-hanging fruit first. Draw up a short list of the things you want to write about the most. The top of the list probably will include amusing or illustrative stories that you’ve been telling others for years. Don’t you think that your readers will be just as entertained? Perhaps you developed a special technique that later proved to be an industry standard; write about its genesis. If what burns in your mind is a fight you had with your younger bullheaded new boss, write about that—and why you were right.

Third, write with your reader in mind. That helps tremendously in keeping you focused. What are the points that you want a reader to take away from your book? By focusing on those, you’ll include only the really interesting stuff.  Stick to the riveting gossip, the tales that make people belly laugh. Pretty soon those pages will be adding up—and you’ll be enjoying your new avocation.

Exercise: Refrain from editing, except for typos, at first. Your capacity for criticism is harshest when it is directed at yourself. You’re not one of the greats yet, so don’t worry about it. You’re just trying to tell your stories in your unique way. Wait until you’re written 25 or 50 pages, and then go back to edit.

“I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there.”
—Richard Feynman

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine


Remote and Untouched

What is a first-person peripheral narrator, and what are the drawbacks of that approach? This type of narrator tells the story in the I-voice, but as a witness of the main character’s story. The first-person voice is just as intimate as when the narrator is telling his own story. Up-close observations fly off the keyboard. Jokes, ironic remarks, and thoughts come more easily when the author writes directly to the reader.  

Yet an immediate narrative voice does not guarantee penetration into the characters. Quite the contrary can be true with an observer. The ease of writing in this voice can delude an author into believing that she is creating depth when she is only adding lacquer to the veneer. That’s because an observer can all too easily be passive. The narrative approach can become a shield behind which the author hides while she remains at arm’s length from the catharsis being experienced by others.

I see this problem mainly with inexperienced authors who write historical fiction. Because the author may feel more comfortable doing research, he remains at a safe distance as he is reanimating history. It’s the same distance between the modern researcher and the long-ago events he is studying. Because he is merely an observer, he remains behind his “camera” as he tells stories about the people he’s read about.

Here is a useful corrective. Skillful writers use this voice to create what is known as the “unreliable narrator.” The character relating the events injects her prejudices against others, such as jealousy, as part of the storytelling. Yet stop right there and think about what is required to be unreliable. The author must get inside the observer’s head in order to create that distorted prism. The very uncertainty the reader feels about the narrator stems from the depth of penetration.

You could go further than that. Like any other major character, the observer can be changed by the novel’s events. Rather than being a passive observer, the peripheral narrator in this scenario cannot escape the swirling vortex of the story she’s telling. Now the first-person narrative really is immediate—because you’re inside the story.

Exercise: If you are writing a historical novel, don’t settle for tired facsimiles as your characters. If you want to re-imagine history, start with the notion that your observer must be outrageous. After all, to tell the story in the first place, he has to accompany the protagonist on his journey of extremes. Once you have decided on the qualities of the lead character, pick out equally distinctive qualities for the observer—and bake them into the telling.

“Without heroes we're all plain people and don't know how far we can go.”
― Bernard Malamud

Copyright @ 2019, John Paine

Copyright © 2012 John Paine. All rights reserved.