“Series” is a poorly chosen name for this approach (since it already has a commonly used meaning – a number of books connected by characters and events – and that is not what is being talked about here). What this author is calling a “series” could be referred to less confusingly as a plot strand.

I’ve used this technique, without having heard of it, and combined it with the Seven Point System popularised by Dan Wells (Google for it, he has a series of excellent videos on YouTube), so that each strand is developing in a logical way. A spreadsheet (or a big piece of paper, if you’re old-school) is all you need to use this.

Originally shared by Deborah Teramis Christian

If, like me, you have ever struggled with plot in a book you’re writing, here’s a new(ish) paradigm for thinking of story-things that might be very useful. I’m intrigued by this approach and am going to give it a try with some WIPs. http://www.betternovelproject.com/blog/series-outline/

The headline is misleading: George Saunders does not “demystify” storytelling in these wonderful extracts from a film about him. Instead, he tells us: “I don’t care how old you are. Make something beautiful.”

An excessively pessimistic view of marriage here, but great story fodder in this list of 100 marriages of different social classes (followed by 12 more in depth). Via The Public Domain Review. 

When I review books, the ones that earn five stars have both fresh, interesting ideas and excellent execution. One or the other gets four stars, unless the weaker one is especially weak.

This is basically what Rachel Aaron is talking about, from a writer’s perspective, in this post, using the metaphor of the Great British Bakeoff.

Originally shared by Rachel Aaron

Writing Wednesday: Flavor vs. Bake

First up, if you’re at all interested in the self publishing business, go and check out the latest Author Earnings Report . It’s one of their better ones and paints an amazing picture of the current Amazon book market (which is pretty much the #1 most impor…

From standoutbooks, a simple formula for effective blurb writing:

1. Hook (context; why this story is interesting, usually because of a setting or character).

2. Conflict (what goes wrong).

3. Teaser of how the story might develop, the possibilities for triumph and disaster. 

4. An indication of how the story might make the reader feel.

5. Involve the reader with the word “you”. 

The post makes the point that structuring a blurb this way gives the potential buyer the experience of already reading the book and wanting to read more. 

I would warn, though, especially for indie books, if you praise your own book too much in step 4 (“a stunning triumph of literature such as you’ve never read before”), it’s more likely to repel readers than attract them. Use that step like a restaurant sign: this is the kind of experience the book offers. In other words, give genre clues, so the potential purchaser can decide whether that’s the experience they want today. 

I hadn’t thought about it before, but now that she points it out, I think KKR has a point here. There is a blanding of voice going on in today’s publishing landscape. You can pick up books by half a dozen different authors and have difficulty telling them apart. (Not only because of voice, either. A lot of people are trying to write the same books, because those books sell.)

She calls out the Clarion Writers’ Workshop in particular. I’ve heard from other sources that Clarion graduates do tend to write similar stories (which become part of the expectation of what a pro story is like, so even people who haven’t been to Clarion start writing that way).

I disagree with Rusch about head-hopping – I think it is a fault, and disorienting to the reader, unless you’re in omniscient POV (at which point it isn’t head-hopping) – but her main point is valid. I’ve experienced several critiques which seem to be aimed at flattening out my style and voice into the way the critiquer would express things, and generally that comes from a critiquer who is not as well-read as I am – who has mainly read recent books which are written in the bland, generic “Serious Writer Voice”. 

Originally shared by Kristine Kathryn Rusch

Today’s Business Blog looks at a weird phenomenon I call “Serious Writer Voice.” 

This is a good summary of common beginners’ mistakes. The first one, in particular, I notice a lot, and not only in first novels.

Originally shared by Karen Conlin

I’ve been talking and posting about this very topic in the last month, having just finished editing a client’s first novel.

I’m happy to see that I’m right on track with Carolyn Haley, the guest blogger at Richard Adin’s “American Editor.”

Writing advice, in the surrealist spirit of McSweeney’s.

Originally shared by S. A. Hunt

“TIPS AND TRICKS FOR WRITERS”

Are you certain that being a writer is for you? Are you sure you’re a writer at all? Are you having an existential crisis, or a dilemma of purpose? Perhaps you are a cane toad. Consider these suggestions:

Look at the other people around you. If you’re talking to people who have been dead for years, then that’s a sure sign that you’re qualified to be a writer.

Try to levitate. Are you able to shift objects across a room without going near them? Can you switch appliances and lights on and off with thoughts alone? Can you make objects appear before you just by wishing? Then you may very well be a writer.

If you are a writing mentor, or are looking for one, hop on over to this post right here.

Originally shared by Mary Robinette Kowal

Periodically, I get people asking if I’ll mentor them. I don’t, because my schedule is tight enough that I don’t feel like I can take on another job and do it justice. But I know that there are people who do and it occurred to me that I could just ask…

Yes!

Originally shared by Writers Write

Hyphenating numbers http://bit.ly/1OPoAdN