I was at Dragon*Con over Labor Day weekend and was on a couple panels. While on an editors’ panel there was a question from the audience about whether someone should mention in a query letter that the novel being submitted is the first of a trilogy (or series) and the next two books are already written.

Now, you’ll get lots of advice on this question, either way. Yes, mention it and no, don’t. That’s not  my topic.

The interesting thing that one of the panelists brought up had to do with whether to write a trilogy or series as an unpublished author. The gist wasn’t to discourage the planning of a series, but to point out that, financially and creatively, it doesn’t make sense to start the second book of your series before the first book is sold. The panelist said, "Finish your book, polish it, sent it out, then start on something new."

I hadn’t really thought of it in such bald terms, but I agree with this sentiment. The first book I wrote has a sequel, but I haven’t started writing it (much to my little sister’s chagrin). I didn’t really think about why, except that I needed to concentrate on getting the first book sold.

From a strictly numerical odds standpoint, it makes no sense to start on the second book. If you fail to sell the first, then complete the second, you have two complete books (yay!), but only one salable book. If you had started on a brand new book (even if it’s for another series), then you have two completed books and two books you can send out to agents.

For so many of us, the ideas lend themselves to trilogies or series. And once we’re ensconced in a world, it is hard to let it go, but if you’re an unpublished author with your first book complete, consider moving on to an entirely different project as you shop that first book around. If you sell that book, great! You can switch over to the series at any time. If you don’t sell the first book, when you get the other book done, you have something else to shop around. Two completed books, two salable projects.

Work smarter, not harder.

A writer should read within his/her genre, absolutely. The obvious reasons are because you learn what’s been selling in your genre, what others have done, etc. You can consciously study others’ work. However, what is not as obvious is that reading deeply in your genre also allows you to subconsciously learn the mechanisms of that genre. You absorb how to write it. As an example, when I was young, I read voraciously in the horror genre (back, yknow, when there was one :p). I mean I would probably read thirty books in a year, just in horror. Some of it was awful, some of it was amazing. As a writer now, I don’t write horror, per se, but some of my stories do contain horrific elements. Those are the easiest bits to write for me. Those scenes tend to need the least revision and editing. And I firmly believe that it’s because of how deeply I read in that genre.

As an editor, I know right away when an author hasn’t read much in the genre she is trying to write in. Why? Because the settings are stock, the characters tend to be stereotypical and the plot is often predictable. And it’s because they don’t know what went before them. They don’t know the tropes of their genre, therefore that cannot avoid or otherwise set the tropes on their ears. You can’t play with something if you don’t know it exists.

Every genre has its rules, its reader expectations and its tropes and, as writers, we have to be educated in those items. In the same way that one cannot *effectively* break the rules of grammar unless one is very familiar with those rules, the effectiveness of writing within a genre is going to be tied directly to knowledge of that genre.

Do you read in your genre? Classics? Current stories? Why or why not?

Tags: genre, reading

So you might recall that in June 2008, I received my Master of Arts in Writing Popular Fiction from Seton Hill University. In July 2009, we found out that SHU got approval to confer a Master of Fine Arts degree, which is the terminal degree in creative fields. This is desirable for those who want to teach at the university level (and for those who like a lot of initials after their names. I won’t disclose which I am ). Alum were given the option to come back for half the necessary hours and receive a MFA, so a slew of us have descended on that lovely campus and probably scared all the new students silly.

The program has changed a bit since I graduated. The main difference is the inclusion of online classes. (This is what kept me so busy the first half of the year.) There are a total of five classes: three genre reading classes, a teaching popular fiction class and a writing popular fiction class. The genre readings are fun, for the most part. Choice of genre class is left up to the student. So far, I’ve taken a horror class and a mystery classics class. Both of those genres figure a lot into my writing. I’ve also taken the teaching class, which was very, very challenging. I’d forgotten how time consuming and mentally intensive reading academic non-fiction is! I learned a lot from that class though and I’m glad I took it. Because I was doing so much reading last term, I’ll be reviewing the readings and notes from the teaching class. Expect some posts on that before the year is out!

I have one more genre reading class (it’s going to be YA/middle grade) and the writing about popular fiction class, which I believe is going to be taught by Nicole Peeler, who’s new faculty at SHU. I’m taking the writing pop fic class this term and the reading in January.

This term, I’m back on with the writing component! Last semester, since I took three reading-intensive classes, I opted to wait to take a writing section. As a result of all that reading, I got no writing done at all during the term! My own fault, but I’m really glad I’m getting back to it. For the writing term this semester, I’m going to be working on a middle grade paranormal called Keepers of the Key. It’s about a set of twin girls who discover they’re the guardians of Pandora’s box. I’m very excited about it. I did a rough and dirty draft for NaNoWriMo last year, but it needs LOTS of love, so that’s my project for this writing term. The title will most likely change, since it applied to the original concept (which was a short story) but no longer does. I suck at titles. Maybe I should suggest that as a class: Titling for Dummies. Anyway, that’s an entirely different post.

The other component to the SHU MFA are the residencies. We all descend on the SHU campus for five days of brain-leakingly (yeah, I went there) intensive modules and critique sessions. We meet with our mentor and critique partners for the term (I’ve got two rocking partners!). We make merry and go on very little sleep. This residency was a blast, but exhausting, for a number of reasons. Alcohol may or may not have been involved. But that is, also, another post, which will probably come tomorrow-ish.

I’m going to be reviving my What I’ve Learned posts, which include stuff from the program as well as stuff I pick up along the way which helps with writing, rewriting, revising, proofing, submitting and the overall publishing process. So look for those in the near future, as well!

Onward! To the keyboard!

Are you a horror writer? Yes? Have you read Doug Winter’s essay, “Darkness Absolute” in On Writing Horror? If you haven’t, you should purchase that assemblage of essays collected and edited by Mort Castle and read Doug’s. It’s mandatory reading for horror writers. I don’t care that you didn’t know that. Get there, now.

“Horror is not a genre. It is an emotion.” (125)

Although I expect some might find this controversial, I think it is dead-on. What makes horror horror is the fear factor. Without it, there is no horror. Interestingly, I think horror is most closely aligned with romance in this regard. Romance is also an emotion. Without love, there is no romance “genre.”

Winter goes on to point out that horror “can be found in all great literature” (125). This is also true. Certainly, the seminal works like Frankenstein and The Strange Case of Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde and the works of Poe are horror, without a doubt. But horror also shows up in “Heart of Darkness” by Conrad (horror of man’s descent into madness), Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury (horror of political and social anarchy) and “Flowers for Algernon” by Daniel Keyes (horror of loss of self).

Winter also touches on the need for reality in horror. He argues that we need normality in horror in order to bring out the horrific elements. Again, I agree. In the same way that alternative music can only exist if it’s different than the music played on Top 40 stations, horror is only effective if it can be contrasted with what is “normal.”

Other topics in the essay include subversion, monsters, originality and characterization. It’s a must-read for horror writers, but non-horror writers can also gain a lot from the information here. I really recommend this highly!

Something new!

Write a scene where one of your characters (from any story you've written)
meets a well-known historical figure. Use the time period current for your
character. Shoot for 500 words.

Let me know how it goes!