I was querying my editor about some changes the other day, and when she answered she also let me know the STATE OF DECAY cover has been completed, and included a snapshot. I think they did a really great job…I’d love to see the artist’s rendition of the other characters because whoever did it captured Wachalowski very well
…it still feels a little strange to see my name on it - awesome, but strange…
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
Working on the edits for STATE OF DECAY has been an eye-opening experience so far. Although relatively minor, the book will absolutely be better for them, but the thing which occurred to me as I dug into them was not so much what I was asked to change, but what I *wasn’t* asked to change. This got me thinking about the road I took to get to this point, and the topic of sticking to your guns.
Early on, after I’d already bugged everyone I thought I could for test reads and feedback, I decided to consult a professional. I won’t name the person I used unless asked, but I found her online and (for a modest fee) she had a look at the first chapter of my novel (which was called RISE at that point). I did not have a publisher or even an agent, and before I started really pushing I wanted to get an impartial opinion from a pro. I wanted to know how I could make my book the best it could be.
She looked over the chapter, got back to me in a timely manner, provided excellent feedback and even sent along a series of helpful .pdf files that covered topics such as style and the use of dialogue tags. She was responsive by email, polite (but honest), and completely professional. It was well worth the money she charged to do it (for a chapter, at any rate, I did not elect to have the whole novel looked at).
She did make three big recommendations, though; one I chose to ignore, and the other two I chose to adopt. STATE OF DECAY is told in multiple first person, with four narrators. The first big recommendation was that I not introduce the narrators one right after the other, as the first four ’sub-chapters’ of the book. I chose to follow that advice and broke up the introductions, saving the fourth narrator for the first part of chapter two. The second big recommendation was that the story not be told in first person (especially not multiple first person). The third was that my use of dialogue tags was a bit sloppy.
Now, to be fair, her advice regarding the narrative was based on what she knows of the industry, which is a lot; most books, especially science fiction, are told in third person. It’s what readers are used to, and publishers/agents might be less willing to take a chance on a new author when he’s adopted some wacky narrative. I decided to stick to my guns on that one; it was how the story came to me, and I thought if it failed then it should at least fail on its own merits. This is how it shook out:
1. Neither my agent or publisher had any issues with the narrative.
2. One of the first items on the list of edit notes was to make the introduction of the four narrators contiguous.
3. Prospective agents/publishers *would* have had an issue with my use of dialogue tags, but never got the chance because I took that criticism to heart and worked to get better at it before submitting.
As I wrote and polished the book I obsessed a lot about what might potentially turn off a potential agent or publisher…too many narrators, too much vulgar language, too much violence, not enough violence…in the end I decided to worry about the technical aspects (like dialogue tags, characterization, etc), but let the story tell itself the way it wanted to be told, and I think that’s the best advice I can give - if the technical stuff is in order, even if you go a little ways out on a limb you won’t necessarily be rejected out of hand.
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
I received the notes from my editor yesterday, and have taken some time to study them…what I have found is most interesting (well, to me it is). The what of it is ‘things that need editing’. What was interesting about it? Let me tell you…
First off, I had assumed that the process would be similar to what it was when I authored my non-fiction book…that time around, I would be sent a chapter (or group of chapters) at a time, each marked with things to check (mainly for technical accuracy). I would rework them as needed, then send them back, and we went on in that manner until we’d gone through every chapter. With STATE OF DECAY, my editor (Jessica Wade) sent a document outlining all of her notes for the entire book. This actually makes a lot more sense…since one change may affect others down the line, everything needs to be taken in as a whole.
I wasn’t sure what to expect from this part of the process - according to critics of the publishing ‘machine’ this was to be the moment where my masterpiece would be mangled and then smashed into some mass market mold - I am happy to report this is not even close to being the case.
The notes were seven pages or so, and contained two basic sections - kind of ‘broad strokes’ and ‘fine strokes’. I don’t want to give details of the story away, but the broad strokes were along the lines of ‘this portion or arc of the story could use some fine tuning’, and the fine strokes were along the lines of ‘there was a continuity error on page 410′. At the end of the notes was a mandate that I get the word count down to 100K from 110K, which I already knew was going to be the case.
Since this is my only experience with this sort of thing so far, I have no basis for comparison - it’s possible that often this process is much more painful - but looking through Jessica’s notes was a totally positive experience for me (I only had to remind myself I wasn’t perfect once, at the onset) - she has a seriously sharp eye and found many little details that needed reworking. She reads books and studies what makes them successful for a living, so she reads more than I ever could…it was like having a particularly great test reader step in at the end, which in a way I suppose it was.
The Devil is in those little details…people notice little inconsistencies or errors, I know that because *I* notice them when I read or view other people’s works (oddly, the seem easier to pick out in those cases). I get them, though - when you’re dealing with 100K words with multiple characters and arcs, the more backup you can get the better.
I have one month to make the changes…more to come.
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
After consulting with my editor, it appears my novel will not be under the ACE imprint, but under the ROC imprint. Since I wasn’t completely sure what an imprint was, I did some extensive research (and by ‘extensive research’ I mean ‘I checked Wikipedia’) to see what was what. I’m still not completely sure I know, but it seems to go something like this:
There is an entity known as ‘The Penguin Group’. The group, in actuality, has nothing to do with penguins per se. Wikipedia had this to say about it:
The Penguin companies comprising the Penguin Group are collectively the second largest trade book publisher in the world, behind Random House. “The Penguin Group” is the name of the unincorporated division of the parent Pearson PLC that oversees these publishing operations. Its United States arm is Penguin Group (USA) Inc.
The plot thickens - It seems that long ago, a company in America split off from a British entity called ‘Penguin Books‘ to become NAL (New American Library). Much later, it ended up being reintegrated into the USA branch of the ‘Penguin Group‘. The Penguin Group, and NAL, brings us to ROC.
ACE is one of the imprints of The Penguin Group, as part of the NAL (if I understand all this correctly)…ROC is another such imprint, which shares the same editorial team as ACE. Collectively, they seem to be known as ‘ACE/ROC’.
Jessica Wade is therefore on the editorial team for ACE/ROC. I may, therefore, sometimes refer to her as the ‘QoR’ (unless she tells me to cut it out, which may happen at any time).
Long story short - I’m not sure what the exact difference is between ACE and ROC…I suspect marketing reasons, though they both deal in Science Fiction. Both have impressive stables of authors (that’s where they keep us, btw)…either way though, it sounds like being part of the Penguin family is a good place to be. Just replace any instances where I mentioned ‘Ace’ with ‘ROC’.
I will update my animated GIFs…
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
I imagine sometimes that a point will come where the prospect of ‘back cover copy’ doesn’t thrill me, but I believe in living in the moment - it’s my party, and I’ll get excited about back cover copy if I want to. Which I do.
The back cover copy is basically an ultra-short synopsis. Those of you who have had to write them know how difficult writing a short synopsis can be…when I was shopping the book, some publishers/agents wanted a ten page synopsis, some a three page, and some only wanted a single page. Summing up the whole of your story in a single page can be painful - the back cover copy turned out to be 156 words.
I was spared a lot of the pain since Jessica sent me a version to review - I did some alterations, it was determined to be a little too long, Jessica did some editing, and the end result looked great. Again, as I was with the cover art, I was a little surprised at the level of input I had…a lot of what I’d read online (especially from those banging the POD drum) sort of led me to believe this might not be the case but I’ve been consulted every step of the way so far. Maybe I’m missing the naysayers’ point but I just don’t feel like changing the title is ’stifling my creativity’…I feel like the publisher wants the book to succeed, that the people there know a lot more about this business than I do, and that if the book does succeed then both me and the publisher will be happy.
As far as the title change itself goes, I am excited for two reasons; first, I like the new title better than any of the previous contenders, and second, I like the possible implications behind *why* the change was suggested.
The new title is STATE OF DECAY, which to me is just catchier and sounds cooler. Again, I was asked and not told, which was nice…there were other possibilities on the table, but that was everyone’s favorite and I like it, too.
As to *why* the suggestion to change the title came about, Jessica informed me that the publisher ‘felt that the book really had mainstream, Philip K. Dickian’ thriller potential’, and that the title REVIVORS was too locked into the genre. Now, I realize I am not being directly compared to Philip K. Dick here, but being a huge fan of his work it’s nice to share a sentence with him at any rate - I’ve been described as ‘dickian’ before, but never ‘Philip K. Dickian’.
I am keeping my hopes in check for now, but I took it as good news, and am more than happy with the title change, especially if it means more people will end up reading my stories.
…once the rest was ironed out, Jessica also mentioned that she’ll be getting her notes to me (regarding editing changes) either at the end of this week, or the beginning of next. More to come…
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
In my REVIVORS series, certain characters are able to communicate with each other (among other things) by using a wireless interface implanted in their heads. Using only their brainwaves, they are able to manipulate the interface so that they can send and receive messages, open and close network sockets, run translation software, facial recognition software, and a host of other neat stuff. The idea has been used before, largely I think because it *felt* plausible - computers keep getting smaller and more sophisticated, the interface keeps getting more refined…how long before we cut out the ‘physical’ UI altogether?
Maybe not that long, as it turns out. Apparently a successful test was run where a man ‘twittered’ using only his brainwaves
…true, he had to be looking at a screen while he did it and it’s a far cry from the technology used in REVIVORS, but hey you’ve got to start somewhere - it’s proof of concept. I imagine such a technology would have better applications than just twittering. At least I hope so. I also hope that should the technology ever become available to the mass market, the interface will be refined enough to only allow purposeful communications to avoid scenarios like this one:
Woman (over brainwave messenger): Bob, what are you thinking about?
Man (over brainwave messenger): Um, dinner?
Woman (over brainwave messenger): Well, I know that’s not true. You’ve been streaming your thoughts for the last fifteen minutes.
Man (over brainwave messenger): LOL! Um, you’re kidding, right?
Woman (over brainwave messenger): Not really, Bob. You are seriously one sick individual. I am leaving you, and taking the kids with me.
Man (over brainwave messenger): Mary, wait, I -
<You have been placed on Mary’s ‘ignore’ list>
I guess we can chalk stuff like that up to ‘growing pains’. It will be worth it in the long run to be able to order pizza without getting up.
. . .
. . .
Posted in Uncategorized.
I actually got word from my editor, rockstar Jessica Wade, a while back regarding the REVIVORS cover art. This is a topic which probably should have taken precedence over a made up stress test but my brain does not always function normally. Don’t judge me.
The cover art of a novel is something I think that is close to every author’s heart…after all, it will be the first impression potential readers get of your book, and we all know how important those are. Being a sort of hack artist myself (as you can see from my ‘Art’ link, I have a lukewarm love affair with ultra-fine Sharpies) people I know were quick to ask me ‘will they let you do the cover?’ The answer to that question is ‘no, they will not’, and I’ll follow that up by adding ‘no, and they should not’…I enjoy art as a hobby but it is not my profession - Ace has a department of professional artists who do this for a living, and though REVIVORS is my baby, they know what they’re doing far better than I.
That said, Jessica was not only extremely responsive to my input, she actively solicited it. To start, she looked at a mock up I did…that is where I learned I am a writer of both TCL scripts and fiction, not a graphic designer (an x-ray on the cover implies a medical thriller - I did not know that). Once we established that the cover should have a recognizable human figure as the centerpiece (and that probably that human figure should be the main character) she took a lot of suggestions regarding what exactly he should look like.
From a style standpoint, I don’t go too far in describing my characters appearance; I give approximate age by context only, rough build, hair color, and (aside from one character making note of another’s features such as ‘her nose had been broken, once’) that’s about it…I have a very clear image in my mind as to what they all look like, and I know the reader will form their own. I don’t think it’s necessary to inject my exact image of them into the reader’s heads. What I did, then, was to break things into two categories for her; traits that I see in my ‘version’ of Nico Wachalowski, and traits that are specifically referenced in the book.
She accepted, and was interested in, all of this, including a list of possible scenes where the cover ’snapshot’ might take place. She asked what he wore, and even, when I said he was armed, asked what type of weapon he carried.
Honestly, when I really thought about it, it was a lot more say into the process than I thought I would ever get. I’m anxious to see what they come up with…
We shall see…
. . .
. . .
Posted in State of Decay, Writing.
The man in the photo is Richard Tappan, or as I knew him, Mister Tappan. He taught English at my High School. Despite what the picture itself looks like, it was not taken circa 1840 but 1992 or thereabouts. I think it may be a victim of one too many reproductions, but I actually kind of like it because to me it looks like Charles Dickens or someone should be standing next to him and he’d probably dig that.
When I was in high school, I don’t remember writing ever edging the needle on my social barometer away from ‘uncool’ and toward ‘cool’. I wrote all the time and my parents were patient and encouraging, but Mister Tappan was the first person I think I met who looked at my stuff with a truly critical eye. I didn’t even totally get it at the time, but writing was important to him. He seemed to believe that writing was more than just putting words on paper.
I bring this up because, as I hand in my second novel to my editor and wrap up the outline for my third, I find Mister Tappan in my thoughts more and more. Part of that is because of some recent medical troubles he’s experienced…I worry for him and pull for him daily…but the larger part is because he was the first person to make me understand that writing is important, and that if I tried hard enough, I could do it well. I had a difficult time integrating as a youth, but he noticed me, he listened to me, he read what I wrote, he was honest, and critical…he took me seriously, and he made me believe I could do it.
This was a pretty good feat, too, because I’ve read some of his stuff - not only is he extremely talented but he’s old school - a classic. I doubt anyone ever gets eaten in one of Mister Tappan’s stories…I have to give him credit too for looking past my weird infatuations and seeing the writing itself for what it was.
Years went by, and forty approached - after a long road I did manage to finally get published, and I owe a debt to many for that…among them is the man I never forgot, the man who is Richard Tappan in my mind but will always be Mister Tappan in my heart, and that ain’t a bad thing.
So how about you? Who told you that you could write?
. . .
. . .
Posted in Writing.
I’m no Hollywood insider and so I can’t say with any certainty what the next big thing to hit the multiplex will be, but I’ve been around the block a few times and so I feel like I can say with some comfort that there might be a conference call going on somewhere to decide whether it’s better to create a new property with a D-list superhero like The Green Lantern or Aquaman, or just go ahead an remake an A-list superhero property a third time. Well, forget all that - I’ve got your next blockbuster right here, and it’s called Hellstrom’s Hive.
If you haven’t read this masterpiece, it was written by Frank Herbert. He’s best known of course for the Dune series, but devoted fans will recognize that he was also responsible for dishing out some of the trippiest science fiction out there. I kid about the Green Lantern thing, but I think that project might actually be in the works…I just read somewhere that Dragonball Z is being made into a live action movie. This got me thinking why, with so many unsung gems like Hellstrom’s Hive out there ripe for the picking, do films constantly retread the same old tired fare?
Sure, Dragonball Z has a huge built in fan base virtually guaranteeing that no matter how much money they pump into the thing and no matter how many people throw up in their mouths a little, it will still make it back during opening weekend…I guess I can concede too that perhaps Hellstrom’s Hive is a little obscure even for science fiction fans. I guess I can also concede that some people with more delicate constitutions might be put off by the protien vats, and I suppose I can’t bring that up without also conceding that others might also be put off by the giant, sweat-drain-equipped mating chambers and labs filled with vivisected ‘breeding stumps’. Forget all that, Hollywood, and take a risk. Never mind that you have no chance of ever pulling off a film adaptation of this masterpiece without completely alienating its small but rabid fanbase, and also that on the outside chance that you actually do get it right, you will psychologically disturb many others who wandered in thinking it was a sequel to ‘The Secret Lives of Bees’.
On second thought never mind Hollywood - I totally know why you can never make this movie. Fine, don’t. You’ll just screw it up anyway.
. . .
. . .
Posted in Writing.
