OLD POST ALERT! This is an older post and although you might find some useful tips, any technical or publishing information is likely to be out of date. Please click on Start Here on the menu bar above to find links to my most useful articles, videos and podcast. Thanks and happy writing! – Joanna Penn
However many books on writing we read, and however many novels we have consumed in our genre, there are still things that we get wrong as new novelists.
This is not an exhaustive list, but just some obvious things that, if fixed, may transform your manuscript. Aspects may also vary by genre.
(1) Show, don't tell.
Now I know why editors and publishers say this over and over again. It really stands out in a manuscript when you read with a fresh eye. If the Nazis are marching into a French village, don't report the event in third person. Instead, relate the event from the point of view of a character in the crowd. Make it personal and show their reaction to the event by their behavior. Deep, interior monologues can be replaced with characters doing something or saying something.
(2) Consistent Point of View (POV)
I don't think I really ‘got' point of view until I paid for my first professional edit. I jumped into the heads of the different characters within one scene which can be confusing for readers. Yes, some writers do it but it's best to get POV sorted before you start playing around.
POV is also easier if you think in terms of writing scenes. Each scene has a setting, something happens to advance the plot or reveal character, and there is a point of view. Who is telling the story? Then be consistent within the scene, or if you change heads, then only do it once. There's no exact science to this, but there are some conventions that make it easier for the reader.
For more on story engineering, check out Larry Brook's fantastic tips in this interview.
(3) Deliver on the promise you make the reader.
If there is a murder at the beginning, then we need to know who did it by the end. No matter if it is a massive 7 part series. The story arc in the one book needs to be complete. This is one of the reasons I personally don't like serial books. I like my story to be encompassed in one book. I want the payoff of a good ending.
There needs to be coherence around theme, character arc, plot as well as delivering to the promise of the genre you advertise the book as. I'm writing action-adventure thriller, so I can't spend half the book in one room pondering the world as a literary fiction author could. If you're writing romance, there needs to be a happy ending. (Although apparently, a love story can have an unhappy ending in the vein of Nicholas Sparks!)
(4) Overuse of first names in dialogue
This jumps off the page as the sign of an amateur, and I am absolutely guilty as charged in my first novel. Read your dialogue out loud – with another person. Someone has commented on the blog before about reading it aloud to a recorder and then playing it back again. This is all time-consuming though. I notice this in a lot of indie books.
(5) Overuse of exclamation marks
Yes, this can be fixed by a proof-reader/ copy-editor, but sometimes the text needs to be rewritten as well as the excess punctuation removed. It's trying too hard to communicate emotion to the reader, without showing it in the action or behavior of the character.
Tips on usage from The Perfect Write.
“Some experts feel that exclamation points are the sign of a lazy writer, or worse–an amateur. Whether the rationale for either opinion is sound or not, there are well-grounded reasons for both.”
Conclusion: we can all improve.
One of the marvelous things about being a writer is how we can keep improving. Every word we write can be a step towards improvement. The editing process is all about improvement, about making the book the best it can be. Get people reading your work and critiquing it. We have to keep learning and this is the only way.
View Comments (73)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1 2 3 … 6 Next »I agree with you on showing vs. telling, head-hopping, stilted dialogue, and exclamation points. Though failing to deliver on promises (or leaving plot threads dangling) is also a problem, I wonder if cliches aren't a more common issue for new writers.
As we try to show rather than tell, it's all too easy to fall into the trap of "new" cliches such as "his gut clenched" or "her heart fell." In one manuscript I reviewed, the heroine spent an unusual amount of time "blushing." Even a one-word description can become cliche if we overuse it in an attempt to show emotion. Of course, I'm guilty, too. In one draft, I had my characters "shrugging" and "beckoning". Unusual words pop out when they're overused, especially when we read aloud as you wisely suggest.
ah yes, the cliche - but perhaps this is no longer an issue as demonstrated by 50 Shades of Grey and the immense number of 'inner goddesses' as well as lots of other examples :) But no, I agree with you - cliche is a top one too. Thanks!
Agree. These are some of the most common that I've seen in others work and in mine. I've never really struggled a lot with POV, unless I start thinking about it (I know strange). "Delivering on your promise" is often times advice given to screen writers in the form of "if you introduce a gun in Act 1, it must must go off in Act 2".
One that may be worth adding is continuity of description. If you write initially that a character has one bag, don't have them pull something out of a second bag. The reason you don't want to do this is that it breaks the fictional dream if the reader picks up on it, making it harder for the reader to believe in the story.
Something that's fun to play with in writing is inanimate objects as character within a story. What would the scene you just wrote be like if it were raining? Would it add depth to the emotion or motive in the scene or character? What if the hero drove a bicycle rather than a Mercedes S Class?
Interesting you write about inanimate objects - I just read The Red House by Mark Haddon which shifts POV incredibly fast, even between sentences which can be confusing - and he did have a little piece from the POV of a kite. It jumped out at me. I also don't like animal POV in the middle of an otherwise human viewpoint book. I find that kind of anthropomorphizing annoying - but maybe that's just me!
I see these five a lot too. Another one is repetition -- I think this overlaps with what Lynn's saying about cliché. It slowly becomes obvious on a whole-book scale (my editor told me I have way too much going on with "eyes", which was true... had to do some editing down).
On a sentence-by-sentence level, though, repetition can become really glaring. I'm thinking of when authors use the same word multiple times in a paragraph (or the same fairly unusual word twice in a page). Obviously, some words don't count ("and", "the", etc...)
Another pet peeve of mine is when new authors come up with a dozen fancy synonyms for "said". This is a case where repetition doesn't matter -- as readers, we barely notice "said" but we *will* notice words like "exclaimed" or "opined".
I know I am guilty of repetition as well - especially around words for ancient :) I live on thesaurus.com on the second self-edit pass!
Ha, my crew get lost in the mountains. How many different words for "mountain", "slope", "steep" etc do you reckon there are in the thesaurus?? ;-)
Ali, I was once guilty of using more 'dramatic' words for 'said' until I read Stephen King's 'On Writing' and realised just how unnecessary it is. Using 'said' is perfectly fine, in my view, and if you accompany it with a lot of showing, readers hardly notice it, just as you said. :)
Two things come to mind: a tendency to over describe (it really is amazing how little description one can get away with, besides it slows down the action) and, and newbie poets are especially guilty of this, simply using too many words. Novels contain a lot of words—it’s part of the deal—and when you’re sitting with 4000 words and think you have 76000 to go (or more) there is a little pressure to fill the space with something. Hopefully with the rise and rise of the ebook shorter forms will become more popular again and writers can say what they have to say and get off the page.
I'm glad you say that Jim. I prefer sparse writing myself and get annoyed by the padding, or lack of hardcore editing that seems to go on when print editions are the driver.
I've done a certain amount of beta reading for other people and it seems as though a lot of writers have trouble finding the happy medium when it comes to describing characters -- as Jim Murdoch said, some folks "over describe". On the other hand, I've read pieces where I had no clear picture of the characters when I finished. It doesn't have to be a lot of detail, but if a character's really tall, you could mention that they needed to duck under something as they enter, or that someone took the only chair in the room as the privilege of age. Little things, but they can make your characters more real (and less clunky, if you're prone to overdoing it).
It is a fine line to walk :) I like Lee Child's rather nebulous description of Jack Reacher - unfortunately his height is the most distinctive thing and then Tom Cruise bought the film rights.... hmm....
I agree with you, everything is based on improvement, as we continue writing all day. I recommend everyone, passed two years, to read what they wrote then, and I bet they'll get surprised, because we never write like we did.
and that's probably a good thing too - we mature and change, and hopefully our readers come too.
As an editor & proofreader, I've seen all of these, including those in the comments. Some are more common than others, like replacing "said" with every other word the author can think of. I know I started out the same way as well. And we all probably develop favorite phrases or words that become cliche for us.
I can add one more: having the protagonist/hero saved by someone else. A new writer has to learn that part of the job of the main character is to bring about her own solution.
-sees #4 in effect in The Selection-
The romance has some teenage melodrama in it in the first place, but...
One thing that I've seen is new writers switching between tenses, whether in the same sentence or same story. The only book I can think of off the top of my head that was written in the present tense was The Hunger Games, and while it worked, it took me a while to get used to the style.
As you mentioned above (#2), writers should be aware of a consistent point of view and also stick to the same tense (usually past, which is most common).
Great list. (By the way I saw this link on your Facebook page).
Thanks Eric - I have a problem with tenses but that's what I count on my editor to find and fix for me - I use 2 pro editors and the final one is just before publication to catch any last issues. But I know what you mean, we have to fix everything we can in the first place.
I've also noticed new writers switching POV's but not so much with characters but more so between third and first person.
(I agree that you shouldn't switch between characters in a scene as well, but I've read books with mulitple characters POV switching for every new chapter/part)
It's fun to be the narrator and it's also fun to get inside of your main character's head but I do think the writer needs to make a decision based on story. For example, if important scenes happen when the protagonist is not around it may be a good idea to write in third person so the readers don't miss the scene.
On the other hand, if the protagonist is involved in almost all major scenes then it may be a good idea to get inside their head with first person to show how the character feels throughout the story.
So I think it all depends on the type of story you're telling which POV you should stick with. Even though it may be a hard decision for you, you must think in the best interest of your readers.
I have been reading a lot of Lisa Gardner who does 1st and 3rd POV shifts amazingly well. It just works. I have a blog post simmering on this very subject though as I notice it so much these days. It seems that fluid POV shifting is becoming more trendy in new novels. Worth playing with? Perhaps, but only if the reader isn't confused (as I was with Mark Haddon's The Red House)