Writers conferences are a great way to network with writers, agents, editors, and to learn the most up-to-date information about the publishing industry. Not to mention fine-tuning your craft.
Various PEG editors will be teaching workshops at the following Writers' Conferences this fall:
The League of Utah Writers: 2009 Conference
September 18-19, 2009: The Homestead Resort in Heber, Utah
(Lu Ann Staheli and Heather Moore)
The Book Academy: A conference for Writers and Readers
September 24, 2009: Utah Valley University, Orem, Utah
(Annette Lyon, Josi Kilpack, and Heather Moore)
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Characterization: It’s hard to do
By Heather Moore
The other night I saw “The Proposal” with a friend of mine. Whether or not you like “chick flicks” there were some great characters in there. Yes, a little predictable, but sometimes when watching a movie and analyzing characters, the “aha” light goes on. It’s a little easier to define why one character works and is endearing or relatable, while another might not be, when you see a 2 hour movie.
But what I really want to discuss is a movie I saw a couple of weeks ago, called “New in Town.” Renee Zellweger’s character is a smart, classy, climbing-the-corporate-ladder type. (Incidentally this was the same character-type as Sandra Bullock in The Proposal—but Sandra played it oh-so-much better).
The plot for “New in Town” and Renee’s character were cliché-ish and quite predictable. Renee’s job was to go into a small-town manufacturing plant, that the corporation she worked for had purchased, and to make it profitable. But who shined in the movie was the secretary, played by Siobhan Hogan. She was quirky and her famous, but top-secret, Tapioca recipe became an integral part of the plot. Siobhan’s character “stole the show” and her naivety and small-town good-heartedness felt real, easy to relate to, and easy to picture her as your neighbor.
Here are the things that made up her character:
-Loves scrapbooking, finds value in it and spends time with her neighbors doing it.
-Is the type of person to invite others over for dinner, even if it’s just meatloaf. Which leads to that she’s the type of person who doesn’t put on airs. Meatloaf is good enough for her, so it’s good enough for anyone else.
-Generous and willing to share her Famous Tapioca. Yet, she will not give out the recipe no matter how she is bribed.
-She is trustworthy and trusts back. Also a peacemaker.
-She is a romantic and wants everyone to be happy.
-She lives in a very cold climate but makes the best of it.
-She states her opinion but doesn’t force it on anyone.
-She’s a bit naïve and goes through several upsets because of it.
-She is funny, but unassuming.
-Even when she is emotionally distraught, she makes Tapioca and takes it over to her “enemy”.
I hope this gives you a more rounded view of characterization. It’s not just about description, but about the core of the person. When faced with two choices, which choices would your character make?
For a quick study (and a quick read), I’d recommend Everything is Fine by Ann Dee Ellis. She is a YA author, and her characterization of Mazzy was impressive in that book.
The other night I saw “The Proposal” with a friend of mine. Whether or not you like “chick flicks” there were some great characters in there. Yes, a little predictable, but sometimes when watching a movie and analyzing characters, the “aha” light goes on. It’s a little easier to define why one character works and is endearing or relatable, while another might not be, when you see a 2 hour movie.
But what I really want to discuss is a movie I saw a couple of weeks ago, called “New in Town.” Renee Zellweger’s character is a smart, classy, climbing-the-corporate-ladder type. (Incidentally this was the same character-type as Sandra Bullock in The Proposal—but Sandra played it oh-so-much better).
The plot for “New in Town” and Renee’s character were cliché-ish and quite predictable. Renee’s job was to go into a small-town manufacturing plant, that the corporation she worked for had purchased, and to make it profitable. But who shined in the movie was the secretary, played by Siobhan Hogan. She was quirky and her famous, but top-secret, Tapioca recipe became an integral part of the plot. Siobhan’s character “stole the show” and her naivety and small-town good-heartedness felt real, easy to relate to, and easy to picture her as your neighbor.
Here are the things that made up her character:
-Loves scrapbooking, finds value in it and spends time with her neighbors doing it.
-Is the type of person to invite others over for dinner, even if it’s just meatloaf. Which leads to that she’s the type of person who doesn’t put on airs. Meatloaf is good enough for her, so it’s good enough for anyone else.
-Generous and willing to share her Famous Tapioca. Yet, she will not give out the recipe no matter how she is bribed.
-She is trustworthy and trusts back. Also a peacemaker.
-She is a romantic and wants everyone to be happy.
-She lives in a very cold climate but makes the best of it.
-She states her opinion but doesn’t force it on anyone.
-She’s a bit naïve and goes through several upsets because of it.
-She is funny, but unassuming.
-Even when she is emotionally distraught, she makes Tapioca and takes it over to her “enemy”.
I hope this gives you a more rounded view of characterization. It’s not just about description, but about the core of the person. When faced with two choices, which choices would your character make?
For a quick study (and a quick read), I’d recommend Everything is Fine by Ann Dee Ellis. She is a YA author, and her characterization of Mazzy was impressive in that book.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
10 Random Things You Probably Didn't Know
by Annette Lyon
In today's post, I'm listing 10 things I've discovered over the years that a lot of writers learn over the years but are generally stuff you pick up along the way and aren't things you learn in your typical workshop class.
#1) Fake phone numbers always start with 555. In fact, no state in the U. S. will give out a phone number with this prefix for this very reason. It's reserved for fake numbers in TV, movies, and books. You'll notice it everywhere. Anytime a guy or girl on a show is giving out their number, it's 555-whatever. Sometimes they try to hide that fact by using the letters on the keypad (like "My number is JKL-4378," but JKL is still 555).
I'm just guessing that this came about after that song in the 80s that kept singing the number 867-5309 (you remember that song, right?). Whoever had that number surely had to change it.
#2) If a book is found in a book order (a happy day for any author, right?), then it's been sold at a huge discount. That means that even though the author will likely sell thousands, they'll get pennies per book. In one author's words, they get paid "in paper clips." And keep in mind, their agent gets 15% of those paper clips.
#3) Most books that are optioned for movies are never made into movies. An option means a person or company has paid the author for the rights to be the one to make the movie over a specified period, say three years. If that time runs out and they haven't made a movie, then the movie rights are up for grabs again. Options can be renewed by the same person/company or bought by someone else, and I've seen that happen. Hollywood is great at optioning. Not so good at actually making movies. That said, I'd be happy with getting an option. It would probably be more than I've made on royalties for a single novel.
#4) Most authors never meet their editors. Even if they live near one another. I lived within thirty minutes of my editor's office for my first two books and never met her. For my next three, I lived in the same city as her office, and finally met her around, oh, book five, I think. We had plenty of e-mail interchanges and phone calls, but there was really no reason for us to meet. We just didn't get around to it. We've seen each other several times since (ironically, usually at social events since she's left the company), and I find that's pretty typical.
#5) With some exceptions (usually at small houses), authors have no say in regards to their cover or title.
#6) As a corollary, sometimes (at least with the huge writers) you can tell how big someone is by how big their name is on the cover. With Danielle Steele and John Grisham, for example, there are times you have to hunt for the title because their names are so big on the cover. That's because of the authors' huge fan base. They don't really care what the book is called; they just want the next one.
#7) Grammatical bloopers, typos, and even factual errors can be put into a book without the author knowing it. This is done by well-meaning but idiot copy editors or others along the line who should be flogged, because the author is blamed for them, but he or she didn't get to see the final proof before the manuscript went to press.
#8) Some lucky writers get ARCs, or Advance Reader Copies. These are uncorrected galleys, meaning that it's the full story, and it looks like a full book, and it may or may not have the actual cover on it--but it hasn't been proofed yet, so it probably has typos and it may even have minor inconsistencies (Sarah's eyes might accidentally turn brown on page 218) or whatever.
ARCs are sent out to reviewers, particularly to large magazines like Publisher's Weekly and Kirkus Review, places where book reviews mean a lot. They require review copies 3 or 4 months before a book hits stores, which means they need it before it's actually gone to press. Hence the ARC, which isn't perfect, but it's as close as you're going to get it before the book is actually on shelves.
#9) There's a good chance your publisher will expect you to do 90% of the marketing and publicity. Just expect it. It's exhausting, and there's really no way of knowing what areas of your efforts are making a dent, but you keep plugging along hoping that something is working, because of:
#10) In publishing, they figure that the past predicts the future. If your last book didn't sell that well, then your next one won't either, they figure. That can mean a rejection. Or that can mean a new release date, during a time in the year when you'll have less competition against heavy-hitters. Or it can mean a gentle nudge to try a different genre. Or, again, it can mean a rejection.
On the flip side, if your last book was a whopping best-seller, then your publisher might be your new best friend, wondering what you can give them next and how fast. It's all a numbers game, a difficult road to travel. One not for the faint of heart.
Wow--didn't expect to go from something as light as fake phone numbers to something so serious.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Writing Screenplays
By Julie Wright
My daughter wants to be an actress. She's beautiful and talented and would likely succeed in such an endeavor. She goes to movies and critiques the acting. I go to movies and critique the dialogue and plot twists. Then we go home and argue about why we did or did not like a movie based on our version of critique.
"He's the worst actor ever!" She'll rant. "Did you hear how clumsily he delivered that line?"
"It's not his fault. The line was stupid. No actor could've delivered it right because it didn't belong in the scene in the first place." This is my response.
She made the mistake of arguing that I was wrong. That a great actor could deliver a terrible line and still make it great. And she might be right a little but she's also wrong. It is true that a great line delivered poorly is a bad reflection of the actor. And it is true that a poor line delivered well makes the poor line a wee bit better. But the big truth is that all movies, plays, TV shows start with the writing. The writing has to come first.
I watched a movie the other day which I am sure robbed me of much needed IQ points. When the credits rolled, I looked over to my husband and said, "That is an hour and forty eight minutes of our lives we will never get back."
The writing MUST come first. A screen writer cannot depend on a hunky famous actor to cover up their poor writing for a couple of reasons:
1.The hunky famous actor will likely never sign up to act in a poorly written screenplay (not if their agent has anything to say about it).
2.Stupid is stupid no matter who says it.
I've worked on movie sets and sets for TV series. I've read a lot of scripts in the down time during filming when my particular job wasn't required. I've seen a lot of poorly written scripts and a lot of excellent ones. I've even written a few scripts (some grossly poor, and some better than average).
Consider your favorite TV series, or movie, heck even consider your favorite commercial. Who gave it to you? A writer.
A good writer.
There are many writers who would love to break into the Hollywood scene. People imagine more money exists there for the person with literary dreams. Shakespeare figured out the same thing with his plays. The truth is that more money does exist in Hollywood for writers. Someone who sells two one-hour scripts can (on average) make forty thousand dollars a year--a little less than the average annual wage of a teacher. But still, it beats the average of the poet's annual wages.
So how do you make your voice stand out above all the others clamoring to be on the writing team for Lost? Oddly enough it's the same for standing out for publishers of novels. You must demonstrate your talent, and abounding professionalism.
Professionalism means you need to know how the industry works, how to format a script, and how not act like a jerk.
Some great resources for would be script writers can be found in the Complete Book of Scriptwriting by J Michael Straczynski. Screen writing is a better page-for-page paid gig than novel writing if you are someone who NEEDS to tell stories. But it's a long haul--like novel writing. If it's something you want to do--you gotta read the above mentioned book. I'll drop in during the next few weeks with some advice of my own.
While you're writing your screenplay, please keep in mind that I don't want my IQ to drop any more than it has. Write something brilliant so my actress daughter can tell me how great actors are. Don't worry; I know where the credit really goes.
My daughter wants to be an actress. She's beautiful and talented and would likely succeed in such an endeavor. She goes to movies and critiques the acting. I go to movies and critique the dialogue and plot twists. Then we go home and argue about why we did or did not like a movie based on our version of critique.
"He's the worst actor ever!" She'll rant. "Did you hear how clumsily he delivered that line?"
"It's not his fault. The line was stupid. No actor could've delivered it right because it didn't belong in the scene in the first place." This is my response.
She made the mistake of arguing that I was wrong. That a great actor could deliver a terrible line and still make it great. And she might be right a little but she's also wrong. It is true that a great line delivered poorly is a bad reflection of the actor. And it is true that a poor line delivered well makes the poor line a wee bit better. But the big truth is that all movies, plays, TV shows start with the writing. The writing has to come first.
I watched a movie the other day which I am sure robbed me of much needed IQ points. When the credits rolled, I looked over to my husband and said, "That is an hour and forty eight minutes of our lives we will never get back."
The writing MUST come first. A screen writer cannot depend on a hunky famous actor to cover up their poor writing for a couple of reasons:
1.The hunky famous actor will likely never sign up to act in a poorly written screenplay (not if their agent has anything to say about it).
2.Stupid is stupid no matter who says it.
I've worked on movie sets and sets for TV series. I've read a lot of scripts in the down time during filming when my particular job wasn't required. I've seen a lot of poorly written scripts and a lot of excellent ones. I've even written a few scripts (some grossly poor, and some better than average).
Consider your favorite TV series, or movie, heck even consider your favorite commercial. Who gave it to you? A writer.
A good writer.
There are many writers who would love to break into the Hollywood scene. People imagine more money exists there for the person with literary dreams. Shakespeare figured out the same thing with his plays. The truth is that more money does exist in Hollywood for writers. Someone who sells two one-hour scripts can (on average) make forty thousand dollars a year--a little less than the average annual wage of a teacher. But still, it beats the average of the poet's annual wages.
So how do you make your voice stand out above all the others clamoring to be on the writing team for Lost? Oddly enough it's the same for standing out for publishers of novels. You must demonstrate your talent, and abounding professionalism.
Professionalism means you need to know how the industry works, how to format a script, and how not act like a jerk.
Some great resources for would be script writers can be found in the Complete Book of Scriptwriting by J Michael Straczynski. Screen writing is a better page-for-page paid gig than novel writing if you are someone who NEEDS to tell stories. But it's a long haul--like novel writing. If it's something you want to do--you gotta read the above mentioned book. I'll drop in during the next few weeks with some advice of my own.
While you're writing your screenplay, please keep in mind that I don't want my IQ to drop any more than it has. Write something brilliant so my actress daughter can tell me how great actors are. Don't worry; I know where the credit really goes.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Don't Get Mad; Get Published
By Julie Wright
My first experience with publishing a book happened blissfully enough. I sent the manuscript. They sent a contract. I signed it. They sent me my author copies and the ad copies of the magazines they'd advertised for me in. And we were in business.
Book two had much the same results.
Book three . . . not the same at all. You see, even published authors get rejected. Oddly enough, that book was my best work thus far into my career. I knew it was good. But my publisher thought it was too dark for my audience or whatever. So they passed on it.
That unexpected rejection shattered me into millions of pieces of self doubt. When I was finally put back together again enough to get back out there, I found I had contracted a disabling disease. I had JulieWrightus. It's a wretched disease. Don't bother looking it up at the mayo clinic's website. I can give you the symptoms here:
1. Chronic fear usually rearing its head in times of visiting the post office with a large envelope that includes a SASE.
2. A bizarre inability to speak without interjecting phrases such as, "I suck muddy rocks." or, "I'm nothing." or, "I'll never be a good writer like (insert favorite famous author here)."
3. Spontaneous bouts of weeping.
4. An irrational fear of checking email that has the subject line of query.
5. Jealous rage when other less worthy authors get contracts and you don't.
These are the symptoms. If you have three or more, then you too have JulieWrightus. Sorry. It's truly a crippling disease. But there is a cure.
Getting published.
Getting published won't keep all the symptoms away all the time. It won't keep you from feeling like a failure sometimes--we all have moments, but it will stave off the chronic feeling of failure.
The only way to get published is to keep trying.
I have over 100 rejections. One of my most amazing friends and mentors, Jessica Day George has 187. 187! That is a bunch! Brandon Sanderson has rejections; Shannon Hale has rejections; Stephen King has rejections; JK Rowling has rejections. I know of some people who have rejections numbering into the thousands. Yet these people are all published.
What do they all have in common that got them to this state of published bliss? They didn't quit. They didn't give in to the disease.
And though I had the disease so bad, the specialists (James Dashner and J Scott Savage) named it after me, I too found the cure. I got that manuscript published. And not with just any publisher, but the biggest publisher my little market had to offer. It was a great and glorious day when I was able to meet up with my previous publishers at a writing function. It was delicious to shake their hands, smile, and say, "Yes, I'm doing quite well, thank you."
I didn't outright gloat. How would that look? But I felt as though I'd shaken the shackles of my disease.
I was wrong.
Symptoms pop up all the time if I'm not careful--if I'm not constantly moving. I started writing for a different market which meant I needed a different publisher. This meant more queries, more rejections, more symptoms and random screams of, "I'm nothing!"
As I move forward in my career, there are lots of ways to be rejected: in reviews, on blogs, in emails . . .
When I landed my agent, J Scott Savage warned me, "I know you're excited about this step and it IS a huge step, but don't expect a book deal tomorrow. It takes time. I don't want you slipping back into JulieWrightus."
"I won't!" I said. "I plan on living in this moment for as long as I can."
And I've worked hard to keep moving forward and not wallowing. I keep writing new things, knowing that if I keep going--if I never quit--I can outrun the disease altogether.
Don't quit. If you have one rejection, don't quit. If you have 22 rejections, don't quit. If you have 122 rejections, don't quit.
And when you get those letters that say you aren't good enough?
You know they're wrong, so don't get mad; get published.
My first experience with publishing a book happened blissfully enough. I sent the manuscript. They sent a contract. I signed it. They sent me my author copies and the ad copies of the magazines they'd advertised for me in. And we were in business.
Book two had much the same results.
Book three . . . not the same at all. You see, even published authors get rejected. Oddly enough, that book was my best work thus far into my career. I knew it was good. But my publisher thought it was too dark for my audience or whatever. So they passed on it.
That unexpected rejection shattered me into millions of pieces of self doubt. When I was finally put back together again enough to get back out there, I found I had contracted a disabling disease. I had JulieWrightus. It's a wretched disease. Don't bother looking it up at the mayo clinic's website. I can give you the symptoms here:
1. Chronic fear usually rearing its head in times of visiting the post office with a large envelope that includes a SASE.
2. A bizarre inability to speak without interjecting phrases such as, "I suck muddy rocks." or, "I'm nothing." or, "I'll never be a good writer like (insert favorite famous author here)."
3. Spontaneous bouts of weeping.
4. An irrational fear of checking email that has the subject line of query.
5. Jealous rage when other less worthy authors get contracts and you don't.
These are the symptoms. If you have three or more, then you too have JulieWrightus. Sorry. It's truly a crippling disease. But there is a cure.
Getting published.
Getting published won't keep all the symptoms away all the time. It won't keep you from feeling like a failure sometimes--we all have moments, but it will stave off the chronic feeling of failure.
The only way to get published is to keep trying.
I have over 100 rejections. One of my most amazing friends and mentors, Jessica Day George has 187. 187! That is a bunch! Brandon Sanderson has rejections; Shannon Hale has rejections; Stephen King has rejections; JK Rowling has rejections. I know of some people who have rejections numbering into the thousands. Yet these people are all published.
What do they all have in common that got them to this state of published bliss? They didn't quit. They didn't give in to the disease.
And though I had the disease so bad, the specialists (James Dashner and J Scott Savage) named it after me, I too found the cure. I got that manuscript published. And not with just any publisher, but the biggest publisher my little market had to offer. It was a great and glorious day when I was able to meet up with my previous publishers at a writing function. It was delicious to shake their hands, smile, and say, "Yes, I'm doing quite well, thank you."
I didn't outright gloat. How would that look? But I felt as though I'd shaken the shackles of my disease.
I was wrong.
Symptoms pop up all the time if I'm not careful--if I'm not constantly moving. I started writing for a different market which meant I needed a different publisher. This meant more queries, more rejections, more symptoms and random screams of, "I'm nothing!"
As I move forward in my career, there are lots of ways to be rejected: in reviews, on blogs, in emails . . .
When I landed my agent, J Scott Savage warned me, "I know you're excited about this step and it IS a huge step, but don't expect a book deal tomorrow. It takes time. I don't want you slipping back into JulieWrightus."
"I won't!" I said. "I plan on living in this moment for as long as I can."
And I've worked hard to keep moving forward and not wallowing. I keep writing new things, knowing that if I keep going--if I never quit--I can outrun the disease altogether.
Don't quit. If you have one rejection, don't quit. If you have 22 rejections, don't quit. If you have 122 rejections, don't quit.
And when you get those letters that say you aren't good enough?
You know they're wrong, so don't get mad; get published.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Lenses
Several years ago, I took a trip to New York with my sisters and mother. That's a story in and of itself (summary: fun, fun, good food, fun, fun, Broadway show, fun, fun!).
But there was one element of the trip that jumped out at me because of our personalities. And, because I'm a weird writer person, it's stayed with me all these years.
To understand, first, here's a bit of background on each of us:
Mom, since the time she was little, has been fascinated with all things Jewish. She's not a Jew, but I'm betting she knows more about Jewish history, humor, and even Jewish law than your average Jew does. She literally has bookshelves filled with this stuff. She was once offered a free subscription to some Jewish women's magazine because they thought she was Jewish.
My older sister is a foodie and former caterer. She loves hole-in-the-wall bakeries and can come up with recipes that would rival anything you'd find in one. Recently at such a bakery, she pointed to some cupcakes, rolled her eyes, and said, "I could do much better than that." (And she totally could.)
I'm . . . well, you know me. I'm the writer.
My little sister is very much into fashion. Aside from the time I showed up at her house early in the morning, there's not a time I've seen her in her adult life where she hasn't been properly coiffed and accessorized to the hilt.
Okay, so back to New York.
Driving through Manhattan, I flipped out. "Look! It's Random House! RANDOM HOUSE!!!!"
It was a HUGE building with massive lettering, but none of them noticed it, instead saying, "What? Where?" (And I think my little sister might have even said, "What's Random House?")
I saw a ton of other publisher names on buildings, and each time I squealed, imagining what was happening in the upper floors of each one.
As we walked through the streets of Manhattan later on, Mom gasped, stopped, and pointed. We all halted and backed up to see what amazing sight we'd missed. She pointed out an itty bitty Jewish store (seriously, like six feet wide) with the prettiest menorahs she'd ever seen. The other three of us had walked past without even seeing it; the place was one of a thousand windows we'd passed that day.
Not ten minutes later, my older sister was drooling and gaping at another window, and the rest of us had to backtrack to see the darling little bakery she found that displayed cakes that were practically works of art.
Throughout the entire trip, my younger sister, I swear, was drawn to every fashion spot there was as if they had a homing device on them.
It was as if each of us saw Manhattan through an entirely different lens. I wonder what things I missed because my lens was so different than Mom's or my sisters'. I was glad I had them all with me; I was able to have things pointed out that I would have missed because my lens didn't catch them. All four of us walked the same streets, went to the same sites, saw the same Broadway play. Yet we all actually saw different things.
As you write, think about your characters in the same way. What lens do each of your characters see their world through?
What things stand out to them in their regular world?
If they go someplace new and different, what will stand out to them there? What will they not notice so much because of who they are?
What interests, strengths, and weaknesses help to shape their world into the one they view as "real"?
The "real" New York probably doesn't exist; it's a place millions of people experience in millions of ways, because everyone has their own lens.
Be sure to give each of your characters their own lens too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
