Want to Improve as a Writer? Step One.

This is Lake Sakakawea, up in North Dakota. We just got back from a super long road trip to there from New Mexico to spend some time camping, boating and fishing with family.

This week at the SFF Seven we're asking: How do you level up as a writer?

It's a great question and I look forward to reading everyone else's answers - but I'd like to address something else first. This question makes the basic assumption that all writers want to "level up" - or improve. And improving can mean a lot of things to different people.

I suspect the person posing the topic is asking about becoming a better writer. How do we hone our craft and stretch ourselves as creators. I also suspect that many writers, if you ask them how they'd like to improve, are going to talk sales figures - dollars or numbers. Maybe they'll mention targeting their audience better, or switching up covers for better sales, maybe creating a new series and back-burnering an old one.

But the focus of "leveling-up" is often - distressingly so, to my mind - on selling more books for more money.

This is on my mind because I recently read a book by an Indie author that had me wanting to take the writer by the throat. I'll caveat this by saying I'm super pro-Indie. I self-publish this fantasy romance series, this contemporary romance series,  this contemporary romance stand-alone, and I'm continuing this fantasy romance series on my own. I'm also on the SFWA Self-Publishing Committee and serve as the liaison to the Board of Directors. I'd say I'm tremendously committed to self-publishing as it allows me to be a full-time writer (which I could not be doing solely on my trad income), and I think it's a great option for all writers.

That said... it really annoys me when craft is sacrificed for financial gain. In this case, I was reading the book - and I really like it! The magic system is cool, the characters compelling, the quest and conflict poignant, the love affair tense and full of hope and anguish. I've been looking forward to recommending it. But the prose keeps slowing me down. I finally started paying attention to what the hell felt so clunky and I realized: the author almost never uses contractions.

This was an Aha! moment for me because I've seen Indie authors telling each other this "trick." If they don't use contractions, it inflates word count and thus page count, making the book a longer read in Kindle Unlimited, which pays by pages read. And, yes, this book is in KU. I don't KNOW that this is what the author did, but I'm pretty certain. There's no good reason to have "could not have," etc., and never contract it. It's crazy.

Now, I know most readers won't notice this. Or, rather, they won't notice it consciously. The book has done reasonably well, but some of the negative reviews refer to it being choppy and repetitive. A LOT of that perception comes from not using contractions. There are some other issues, too, but I think as the writer grows, those will smooth out - but this not using contractions?

PEOPLE! DON'T DO THIS!

Seriously, if you're artificially inflating word and page count, then your attention is in the wrong place. There's a reason we have contractions and that's to make the words and story flow. Yes, yes - some writers have characters like androids who don't use contractions and that's a deliberate choice to reflect a lack of humanity. Even then it's a challenge to keep them from sounding, well, ROBOTIC. Also note: lack of humanity. The author I'm talking about used contractions in dialogue, which is critical, but the rest of the prose needs to sound like not-a-computer, too.

All of this comes around to Step One in Improving as a Writer: CARE ABOUT THE WRITING.

Don't make choices that elevate being paid by page over what makes the story good. It might work for one book, maybe even a few, but readers *will* notice. Tell a good story, yes - which this author did! - but tell it well. This whole idea of doing what you love and the money will follow? That idea presumes that when you LOVE doing something, you'll do it to your utmost. If you love the money more, the writing will show it.

Want to level up? First step is to care about being the best writer you can be.

What Lies Ahead? Jeffe's Five Predictions

A panorama of Santa Rosa Lake, New Mexico (and surrounds).

Our topic at the SFF Seven this week is Trend Change: What shifts in the world of writing are you noticing? (Craft, Sales, Publishing, Tech, etc.)

Here's my five!

1. Craft

I think we're going to be seeing greater emphasis on craft. Following the market glut of frequent sequels and stuffed books created for Kindle Unlimited bait, I see readers growing more discerning about looking for the "good stuff." Self-publishing has aged into being an almost universally recognized publishing choice - but with that has come decreased tolerance for anyone doing it on the cheap. There's no excuse for slapped-together covers and poorly edited or formatted books, not when so many authors are putting out books indistinguishable from traditionally published ones. With more and more self-published books reaching award-nomination notice, craft will again become a key quality in a story, rather than low price point or shock value.

2. Sales

We all saw sales take a major nosedive with the 2016 election and ensuing dumpster fire in the US. Thankfully that seems to be rebounding. At least for sales of self-published books, and for those that meet a reasonable quality standard. I'm hopeful that the Amazon sweeps to clear out KU scammers will help restore discoverability of books so that readers are actually seeing relevant books.

3. Publishing

Traditional publishers have been offering fewer contracts for straight-up romance and I think that will continue to decline. Self-publishing and digital publishers like Amazon's Montlake imprint have created a glut of inexpensive romance books so that traditional publishers are simply not seeing the profit margins on the genre that they used to. On the other hand, I think traditional publishers are more and more excited about other genres with romance elements.

4. Tech

I'm wondering how many indie and hybrid authors will start moving to selling books directly from their own websites. The tech is there, as is the incentive to diversify from Amazon. I'm looking at doing this myself.

5. Etc.

We may have passed the self-publishing gold rush boom - but we're also emerging from the bust. Things are beginning to level out and a LOT of authors are establishing relatively stable incomes from hybrid efforts. Traditional publishers are recognizing that their authors will be also self-publishing and they're accommodating those efforts in contracts and in promotions.

I expect things to continue to improve for authors, which means all you readers should be golden!

But THEY Said that Genre Is Dead!

Our new creepy collection of toothy tales, TEETH, LONG AND SHARP, is out! And so gratifying to see it as an Amazon Best Seller. Many thanks to catnip author Ilona Andrews for giving it a shout out that helped push it there.

This week's topic is all about "dead genres."

For those not in the industry swim, this terminology is used primarily by agents and editors. (Maybe by in-house marketing people, I don't know.) They use the phrase in panels at conferences, or during one on one pitches. They'll sadly shake their heads and say, "that sounds like a great story, but that genre is dead." By that they mean, the agents don't think they could sell it to a publishing house and the editors don't think they can sell it to their acquisition board or marketing team.

You'll also hear them say it with confident scorn - largely when asked what they're looking for and what they don't want to see. "Vampires are dead!" they'll scoff, perhaps with an eyebrow waggle for the pun. "I'll set my hair on fire if I have to read another vampire story."

There's a couple of things going on here, one real and one not.

The not-real thing is that this is their job and, like everyone does with their jobs, they get tired of certain things. It's easy to wear thin on stuff and cast your scorn for it in a stronger light than you might otherwise. There's also a huge component to that job that's reading the future. In traditional publishing, they're trying to forecast what readers will want to buy as far out as two or three years. Being able to prognosticate confidently is half the battle. (Being able to accurately do it is the other!) Most of them want to sound smart and savvy, so being able to declare what's hot and what's not is part of that.

If you press them, they'll pretty much all concede that no genre ever "dies," that it's all cyclical, and they mainly mean that it's a hard sell right then. It just doesn't sound as sexy to put it that way.

That leads us to the real part. It's a fact that the publishing market gets glutted. What happens is this:

1. NEW BOOK BREAKS MOLD AND SELLS LIKE CRAZY (e.g., Fifty Shades of Grey, Harry Potter, Twilight)
2. READERS LOVE THIS AND WANT MORE
3. PUBLISHERS SEE CRAZY SALES AND WANT THAT, TOO
4. AGENTS AND EDITORS SCRAMBLE TO PUT OUT MOAR BOOKS LIKE THAT
5. MOAR BOOKS LIKE THAT GLUT THE MARKET
6. READERS BEGIN TO TIRE
7. SALES DECLINE
8. AGENTS AND EDITORS DECLARE THAT KIND OF BOOK DYING OR DEAD
9. NEW BOOK BREAKS MOLD AND SELLS LIKE CRAZY

So, really, it's not like a genre dies on its own. Arguably the industry flogs it to death and leaves it dying on the compost heap.

Still, what authors need to know is that a "dead genre" doesn't mean there's not a market for it. It means they're unlikely to interest an agent in it or sell it to a publishing house.

It doesn't mean that the well-established authors in the field aren't still producing and selling books. They very likely are.

It doesn't mean that self-published books in the genre won't sell well. They very well might! But a little numbers comparison explains that. If an author self-publishes a book and sells 1,000 copies for $2.99, she makes $2,000 on it. Considering that she likely spent no more than $1,500 producing the book, she's already ahead. If she sells 5,000 copies, she's made over $10,000; if 15,000 copies, she's made over $30,000. That's a decent income.

Now, to many publishing houses, selling 15,000 copies is a failed book. They work on an entirely different scale. 

It all depends on what you're trying to do. 

Wait! Don't Burn that Bridge!

You'll hear this advice a lot in the publishing world: Don't Burn Bridges. In case the metaphor escapes you, it means to avoid ending professional relationships in a way leaves a chasm between you that can never be breached.

This is because the publishing world is SMALL. It doesn't feel like it when you're a newbie. It feels really huge, populated by enormous bookstores and libraries, shelved with thousands upon thousands of books. The authors of those books seem to be innumerable, with Jane Austen's novels made in to movies right and left and Molly O'Keefe's showcased in Marvel's Latest.

The people who agent and edit these books, they're names without faces - perhaps with a backdrop of New York City skyscrapers behind them. It doesn't seem possible that this is a relatively tiny microcosm and everybody knows each other.

But they do. They so do.

For example, I know Molly, whose book is being read by Harley Quinn in the newly released Suicide Squad movie. Molly's my friend - we've had drinks together, done an anthology together, and she even read one of my drafts and told me why it wasn't working (the mark of a TRUE writer friend!). She has no idea how her book ended up in Harley Quinn's hands during the filming - just that it was in New York and somehow someone handed Margot Robbie *that* romance novel.

Not only is it a much smaller world than one would think, serendipity plays a huge role in it.

I was reflecting yesterday on my fiction-writing career thus far. I saw someone I've known since 2008 - eight years that feel like many more at this point, because she and I have traveled so far since then. We used to be critique partners (CPs) and were shopping our first novels at the same time. We had a brothers-in-arms type friendship. (I really wish there was a female metaphor for this. Sisters-in-short-skirts?) She went on to found her own publishing house. We haven't had a conversation in something like seven years, but yesterday we were at a writers event together.

It's a really small community, people. You're going to run into the same people over and over again.

Recently on an author loop, I saw someone asking for advice on firing her agent. I advised a personal conversation. It's not easy - confrontation of any sort never is - but it's like breaking up. Some relationships demand that level of in-person respect. I was the lone voice, however. Everyone else spoke up and said to send a certified letter.

Now, most agency contracts specify that - that the relationship should be dissolved in writing. But I *strongly* believe this should happen AFTER the personal conversation. Let me tell you why.

I was at a conference with my agent and a well-known author had just fired her agent, via certified letter. My agent's best friend worked at the same agency as the fired agent, who was someone I also knew and had had drinks with. The fired agent was devastated. She'd had no idea anything was wrong. Imagine thinking your marriage is fine and getting divorce papers in the mail. As a result, ALL the agents were upset. The author's name was on all their lips that week, and not in the best light. Another story that an agent friend told me. An author was deciding between several agents. She asked my friend for an example letter she could send to decline representation. My friend, under the impression that this author planned to sign with her, happily provided the letter. Which the author then turned around and mailed to her, via certified letter.

Can you see how this leaves a bad taste in people's mouths? First of all, it's unnecessarily callous to people who ARE human beings and whose feelings can be hurt in the same way as anyone. Also, it creates a reputation.

I've heard it said that being an author who works successfully in the industry requires three things: 1) excellent work, 2) ability to meet deadlines, and 3) being enjoyable to work with. Also, that you can have two of those three qualities and still do well, but not only one.

And, let's face it, we all miss deadlines from time to time.

Sure, I hear you saying, but self-publishing changes all this! Screw New York and working with those people! And, yes, one of the authors I mentioned is going to self-publishing and more power to her. I hope she does fantastically well. I consider her a friend and I love her books.

The thing is, it's a small community, and when we burn a bridge, everyone nearby feels the heat and chokes on the smoke. And there's no reason to do it. Every once in a while, a relationship goes up in flames and all you can do is try to escape with your skin intact. But, if you can help it, do your best to cut that cord with cordiality. The industry constantly changes and you never know when that person might walk into your life again.

When you run into them years later, you'll be glad you did.

Besides, it's the human way to behave.

Five Traits of an Ideal Developmental Editor

A good developmental editor is key for taking a book from good to great. Or from meh to great. Or even great wad of suckage to great.

I firmly believe every novelist needs a good developmental editor.

Writers of short fiction benefit from them, too, but novels in particular, with all their unwieldy size and multiple threads really cry out for that help.

What does a developmental editor do?

They are the first stage of professional editing. (Feedback from critique partners and beta readers might come before this.) A developmental editor gives generalized feedback on how the story works - where it could be cut for pacing, where more detail can be added for clarification, where emotion can be amplified, perhaps even reordering of scenes for maximum effect. In short, a developmental editor does what it's impossible in most cases for an author to do: evaluate the work objectively.

But how do you choose a really good developmental editor?

I hear a fair number of authors recommend editors saying "they're really good and they don't change my voice!"

Cringworthy.

Why? Because this is utter nonsense. I don't get this writerly terror of having their voice changed. Let me give you a little clue, folks. I'll even all-cap it so it sticks to your brain better.

NO ONE CAN CHANGE YOUR VOICE BECAUSE IT COMES FROM YOU.

Okay?

Okay!

So, let's talk about the actual topic: Five Traits of an Ideal Developmental Editor

1. They can see both the forest and the trees
   
   An ideal developmental editor has a good feel for the overall scope of a story - or series - and can carefully track key worldbuilding details, to keep the story logic in place.
   
2. They care more about the book being good than your feelings
   
   This is particularly important for self-publishers, because the editor is hired by the writer, instead of by the publishing house. The temptation is to keep the client happy by telling them what they want to hear. This is not good for the book. Find an editor who's willing to tell you what you don't want to hear. Then listen to them.
   
3. They also tell you what works
   
   A good editor is able to give praise as freely and specifically as criticism. Beyond the soul-crushing of editorial critique, well-targeted love can show the flip side, where the craft and the story IS working. It's much easier to fix problems when you can study your own successes, too.
   
4. They're able to offer suggestions for fixes
   
   Not all writers like this, but I love it. A good editor can not only say "this isn't working," but offer ideas for rephrasing, clarification, adding, cutting, etc. A smart, talented and diligent editor cares as much about the book as the writers does and can often see what the writer can't.
   
5. They know the market
   
   The best developmental editors know their genre and what's acceptable within the reader contract. Making a book shine means knowing the potential readership and what they'll expect. Adjusting a story to adhere to genre conventions can mean the difference between delighted readers and an angry mob.

What else? Any traits of an ideal developmental editor that I missed?