Chapter Five
After nearly a month since Chapter Four was finished, I have completed Chapter Five.
It took me longer than expected, despite being derailed by the wisdom tooth. I should have finished it a week ago but the chapter required additional attention. Cardinal Cormac Pell O'Connor is a complicated man, and not only did I have to handle him with a certain carefulness I had to put enough back story into the chapter to satisfy the story.
You see, this story draws a lot from history. Although I did a lot of research before hand the story is still growing and I am seeing new things to add that not only sharpen the story but make it breathe a little easier for the reader. It's more interesting than it was when I began, and that means I have to keep that level of interest up for the reader as well. Cardinal O'Connor has a back story and it had to be handled right but I had to be careful to write it correctly to get the full literary significance out of it for those who like to read deeper into a story's meaning.
That's one reason for the chapter taking so long.
The other one I am more interested in. It turns out, this chapter has a lot more words than the others. When I looked at it, I realized why: the chapter is one of only three or possibly four I will have devoted to the point of view of Cardinal O'Connor. Since that is true, I have a lot less space to place with in his story. His story is important, and due to the constriction I think some of that need boiled over into a longer chapter.
I should know if that theory holds true when I write the next chapter. Chapter Six is a Richard McAllister chapter. It is one of three or four he'll have in the book. If it is longer like the Cardinal's, I'll know I am on to something about the length of my chapters depending upon how many chapters those characters get in the book.
So, for those keeping score, here we are:
Prologue: 3173 words
Chapter One: 4060 words
Chapter Two: 3244
Chapter Three: 3660
Chapter Four: 4144
Chapter Five: 4547
Now I am off to outline Chapter Six to hopefully start on it tomorrow!
It took me longer than expected, despite being derailed by the wisdom tooth. I should have finished it a week ago but the chapter required additional attention. Cardinal Cormac Pell O'Connor is a complicated man, and not only did I have to handle him with a certain carefulness I had to put enough back story into the chapter to satisfy the story.
You see, this story draws a lot from history. Although I did a lot of research before hand the story is still growing and I am seeing new things to add that not only sharpen the story but make it breathe a little easier for the reader. It's more interesting than it was when I began, and that means I have to keep that level of interest up for the reader as well. Cardinal O'Connor has a back story and it had to be handled right but I had to be careful to write it correctly to get the full literary significance out of it for those who like to read deeper into a story's meaning.
That's one reason for the chapter taking so long.
The other one I am more interested in. It turns out, this chapter has a lot more words than the others. When I looked at it, I realized why: the chapter is one of only three or possibly four I will have devoted to the point of view of Cardinal O'Connor. Since that is true, I have a lot less space to place with in his story. His story is important, and due to the constriction I think some of that need boiled over into a longer chapter.
I should know if that theory holds true when I write the next chapter. Chapter Six is a Richard McAllister chapter. It is one of three or four he'll have in the book. If it is longer like the Cardinal's, I'll know I am on to something about the length of my chapters depending upon how many chapters those characters get in the book.
So, for those keeping score, here we are:
Prologue: 3173 words
Chapter One: 4060 words
Chapter Two: 3244
Chapter Three: 3660
Chapter Four: 4144
Chapter Five: 4547
Now I am off to outline Chapter Six to hopefully start on it tomorrow!
Labels: The Dagda King
posted by Shawn C. Speakman | 1:15 PM
17 Comments:
Hey Shawn,
How are you doing your word count?
Are you using the word count as it is in the word processor or are you using the publisher's style type of word count?
What is a publisher style word count?
From Teh Innernet: :)
http://www.pammc.com/count.htm
When you query a publisher, it's customary to include your novel's estimated word count. Assuming you use the standard conventions for manuscript format (1" margins, 25 double-spaced lines per page, and a 12 point non-proportional font like Courier), then a good rule of thumb is one page equals 250 words.
Now, I know your word processor will give you the exact word count, but that's not what the publisher is looking for. According to my computer, my second book has 62,389 words. But if I calculate it using the formula, 272 manuscript pages times 250 words/page equals 68,000 words. That's a big difference.
Why the difference? Because short sentences/dialogue, chapter breaks, and scene breaks take up more space on the page, but use fewer words. For example, the sentence "Rick laughed." is only two words, but it occupies an entire line of text.
From the publisher's standpoint, it's more important to know how much space will be used in the printed book than to know the exact word count. S o by using this method of estimating word count, you can give the publisher what they really want.
J.David: I'll give you my take on things, as I understand them from dating a production editor as well as running the gauntlet already.
The use of a formula is really, honestly, pointless. haha I don't say that to be mean, so please don't take it that way.
I use word processor word count. Why? Because different people write different lengths of sentences. The formula gives an average, and it is just as inaccurate as what it is trying to stop.
There are writers like Steven Erikson who write blocks of paragraphs.
Then there are writers like Greg Keyes who have dozens of paragraphs per page.
What if a writer is on the fundamentalist side of things like Erikson or Keyes? It throws the formula right out the window.
When a publisher looks over a query letter, they don't care about exact word count. Not at all. They just want to see where in the ballpark the book is. The difference between 62,000 and 68,000 is marginal. The difference between 68,000 and 120,000 is huge -- or in my case 68,000 to 199,000 (still can't believe I wrote a book that large - ugh).
Now ask, why is it marginal? If the production editing teams at all publishers used the same font, same font size, same space between letters and space between lines, then it wouldn't be marginal.
But that's not what happens when a book goes to the production team. A production editor takes the text and works the pages to the best advantage of profiting (ie. books a certain size make more profit than books of different sizes). By adjusting font style, font size, space between letters, and space between lines, a production editor can take away those 6,000 words your formula is talking about.
That's why an editor doesn't care about 7% difference. They can gain that 7% back with a click of "tracking" in In Design/Quark.
How do you think Terry Brooks wrote six or seven books in a row that came out to 370 pages give or take five pages? It's not because he has close to the same word count. It's because a production editor fiddled with spacing until it came out that way. 370 pages makes the most profit from production costs for the publisher.
All of these things go into producing a book. When an editor wants to know word count, they don't care about the actual word count; they want to know if the project will be viable from a production cost standpoint. Fell Hammer was pretty much screwed from the start. And any book that large usually is unless it is unbelievably good (ie. The Name of the Wind).
That's why I don't think editors or agents care about which word count is used. Both don't matter. People can send in their processor word count or their formula word count -- it all means the same thing to the editor.
Guess what: I hate math.
And that's why I don't use the formula. haha
Excellent explanation Shawn. Thanks for the insight!
Hey Shawn,
Have a technical question i've been mulling over for quite some time and would like to get your take on it. When writing, dialogue aside, how do you feel about contractions. I'm editing my ms for the umpteenth time and i'm always a little tentative on what to contract and what not to. (As I said, dialogue completely aside)
Currently I simply go by feel, when its description or simple narrative I leave the contractions as they stand, but whenever its something of import, I'll generally--and again I go be feel here--not use and contractions. It oft time feels more dramatic to me, as if the reader is forced to more fully engage the negative of the sentence.
Example: imagine a character just died.
He wouldn't be going home agian, seems less dramatic than,
He would not be going home again. The second feels more permanent and focused. But thats just me, perhaps those in the know would say not to contract anything but dialogue. Probably just a matter of personal preference, like all the other little semantics that keep me up at night, but i'd still like to get another author's opinion.
Thanks Shawn,
and keep up the good work. BTW, have you got around to reading Name of the Wind yet, or are ya just going with that example b/c its proven to be such a good book and a doorstop at that!
I'm torn on recommending it to everyone, one hand everyone should read it, on the ohter hand, sequel comes out in 2009, so its a tough call.
Shawn,
I have another question.
How much time do you spend editing after you finish a chapter?
Do you just give it a read through and continue with the next?
Do you go over it a few times with the red pen till you feel you got all your ideas across?
Or do you keep working on it until you feel it can't get much better?
hey j david,
I know my opinion doesn't hold the same weight as Shawns, or anyone else with his credentials, but thought i'd share my process.
I almost always read my previous chapter to set the mood to write the next--or at least read what I wrote last time I set down--and of course, fix any errors I see.
I do the bulk of my editing after my book is finished, as well as a thorough edit from start to present, anytime I feel stuck on the plot. Helps realign your head, and set straight any lingering doubts that may be holding you up. [If you are having trouble moving forward it is likely because you know there is work to be done on what you have, and subcosiously don't want to build on that shaky foundation]
I've edited my entire MS 3-4 times, stylistically and for typos--as well as a sharp eye to make sure everything matches temporally. And after taking a 3 month break, (and writing 290 pages of the stand alone sequel) I am going back through it for my final time, correcting anything that sounds awkward, and making any large/major changes that need to be addressed before I feel it is as perfect as I can get it too start the ardeous oddessy of getting my work published.
--and just b/c i'm anal, and b/c it seems like good sense, I'll further polish my first 3 chapters in hopes of an answered querry.
Hope it was at least mildly entertaining if not a touch informative.
p.s. I say going back through it for my final time, but truth be told I'll probably tweak it right up to the day I get lucky enough to have to hand it over to a publisher. Then I would read it in print and lament that I didn't make this change or that. Or at least thats the dream.
Thanks Sean,
That was an excellent insight.
I finished my first chapter last week. And I have been editing it since then, when I get the chance.
I think I maybe to anal with it, but I think also I need to have this first chapter down pretty solid before I move on, for my own sake. Call it a confidence builder. I just need to prove to myself that what I write from chapter 2 and on will amount to something semi readable.
Also I have taken the this opportunity to learn about the kind of mistakes I make so that I can avoid them down the line. I think it's working. It's turning out pretty good in my opinion.
Sean: Contractions are a trick business. Then again, using all the other tools in the writing toolbox is just as tricky.
There is no correct place to use contractions, just as there is no correct place to use a semi-colon rather than a period. It's personal preference. But that preference should be driven by what lends the most poignant point to the story -- what interests the readers eyes and gets at the point of the paragraph best.
It goes beyond what "feels right," because I think as a writer you should have more control over your story than that. You used a good example all on your own and it is an example that shows the problem well. Contractions, by the large, are tonally closer to dialogue, closer to a conversation, with the reader. Non-contractions are more prim, more proper sounding.
When writing and trying to decide which to use, it all depends on what you are trying to convey to the reader. Therefore every instance is different and there cannot be a hard and fast rule.
In Fell Hammer, as I was writing a serious epic fantasy, I wanted the weight of non-contractions in the prose; I didn't use contractions at all unless it was in dialogue.
With The Dagda King, I have decided to take a different route; since it is set in the real world, writing in the familiar to the reader accentuates its setting. Readers know this world's setting. It is familiar. Therefore I wanted the writing to reflect. I use contractions sometimes right now and at other times I don't. It all depends on the moment and what I as the creator want to mold into the story.
J.David: I'll try to address your editing questions:
How much time do you spend editing after you finish a chapter? How do you go about editing?
Barely any time at all. I have discovered in the last two years that I am still too close to the material -- too wedded to it -- to be an effective editor after I finish a chapter. I have a fairly strong visual memory, and it takes weeks of time to pass before I can view my own writing in an objective way. Since editing should be done without bias, I want to spend my time when it will be most effective.
When I finish a chapter, I read over it one time to make sure it is fully written. And that's it. I sometimes change some words during this time, but I don't look at it too closely.
I then go on to outlining the next chapter.
At the end of the project, I revisit the entire book. I read it and it's like it is new to me. I edit as I see fit. This is also, ironically, how Terry does it.
Then I give the book to a professional editor and I let them rip it apart. When I go back through for what is the third time, I can really focus on the editing and make the book as strong as it can be.
And that's it. No more than three times. I've seen too many writers lose their lives and the writing to rabid editing.
A side note/rant: For some reason, writers think they know more about writing than anyone else, and it is that belief that ultimately dooms them. I am here to tell you unless you have a degree in copyediting, you know nothing about grammar and how it can be used properly in the writing. I know that's extremely presumptive, and you may not be in that boat, but in 99% of the writers out there I am right. There is so much in the English language, and our school system is terrible at teaching it and making it part of your "toolbox."
If you write a mistake into your book and you don't know it is a mistake, you can go over that book a thousand times with a red pen and never catch it. Giving one's work to a professional editor ensures everything is caught and everything fixed before it goes to an agent or editor or publisher.
Contractions are something I've often struggled with myself. Naturally I feel inclined to use them, in and out of dialogue, because that's the way language has evolved over the years.
Everyone uses contractions; and the way I look at is that each story, whether told vocally or through a novel, has a narrator who's effectively telling the story. Odds are this narrator, whoever he or she is, will use contractions.
As Shawn pointed out, however, some stories are stronger for having a more prim and proper narrator, perhaps a scholar who abhors anything that alters the pure state of a language. I think this, ultimately, is what drew me towards writing an Urban Fantasy.
Rowan, the protagonist of my novel, is a young woman, still in her twenties, and that, along with the contemporary setting (for the most part) and the first person perspective, allows me to be very casual and loose with the language. I don't have to go into great lengths of description to convey to the reader simple images because Rowan is able to interpret them to the reader in the same way as you or I would, in simple, casual language.
I've found that being able to use this tone for the novel has made the writing much quicker and definitely stronger for the story I'm telling.
One terrific example of a writer who really shows the versatility of writing is Joe Abercrombie. Each of his POV characters (of which there are 5 or 6) has a different way of viewing the world and Abercrombie shows us this by switching up his writing style as needed. Some of the characters, such as Collem West, are very strict and the language is regal and stiff, using very few things like contractions. Others, such a Northman Barbarian named The Dogman, is very loose and is full of language that most authors wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole. It works remarkably well, though, and helps Abercrombie really set his characters apart.
In the end, as the rest of you have stated, it really matters on the story being told, but also on who is telling the story.
~Aidan
Mightier than the Sword
Thanks Shawn,
thanks Aidan.
Both your answers confirmed my own opinion, its always nice when it works out that way. And I find you are absolutely correct about the editing Shawn, not only will an error escape you everytime, it may very well be an erroneous construct that you unkowingly use throughout an entire work. --which is in part why I'v asked the questions I have on here. And right again about the professional editor. Most people have family members read and perhaps help edit a manuscript, which is good but beware, many mistakes you are making will be a result of how they have conditioned you to think and talk, so they are likely making the same mistakes as are you. [case in point, i had an ex-gf who her and everyone on both parents sides said "ideal" in any circumstance, in a 2 years i never heard one of them utter the word "idea."]
And by the way Aidan, just wanted to let you know that A Dribble of Ink is on my regular circuit of writing website to visit everyday, you are doing a fine job, keep up the good work.
You know, I think I may have used the wrong word. Perhaps Re-write would be a better term than editing for my case.
I am going through and pretty much re-writing the chapter; filling in information I missed, fixing incomplete sentences, adding details, reorganizing sentence order, ect.
I'm not really spending much time on looking at whether or not a comma should be used or if the dialogue is formatted correctly.
Rather I found that things I thought were clear when I first wrote them or that I even wrote are missing and that I did not capture my mind's eye very well.
So let me amend my question:
Do you all spend much time rewriting your chapter when you are through or do you move along?
J.David: I move along. What you are talking about is editing, ultimately. But I find I am still too close to my material to actively see what I did not put in and what else is needed.
Once I step away from it and "forget" what I've done, I can then come back with a fresh eye and see what the reader would see upon reading it the first time. That means more to me than anything because ultimately the book is the readers and I want their experience to be seamless. I can't do that with biased eyes.
When I go through and read it once, I'm merely making sure I finished writing all sentences and paragraphs. I have a tendency to leave unfinished sentences I am having a hard time with dangling as I move forward to a paragraph I do know how I am going to write. *shrugs*
In regards to your answer about editing:
First off, I think we can all agree--do what works for you.
Tell me what you guys think.
IMO, so much of it really depends on where you are at in your progression as a writer. I know I can say that without a doubt, you can pick up my novel and see how much i grew as you read through it. By my own admission, parts in the beginning were rough, whereas parts at the end are...er..um...quite good.
I think that if you're a beginning writer (which i still consider myself), that you can find edits that are damn necessary as you go, even while you are still married to the work. And it is most helpful if you analyze critically what you are doing as you go. That for people just learning the craft, you can go back and see what mistakes you are making, and figure out why an aspect might feel awkward, and apply your solutions to the rest as you go.
While those who are more mature in the process, have defined those pitfalls that are customary and avoid them subconciously. For someone who is an accomplished writer like Shawn (accomplished writer for now, accomplished author hopefully down the road)who has attended writing schools, studied the make up of the genre, and came to the necessary truth of who he is and how he writes, then the edit as you go process is not as necessary. To take it to the furthest extreme, Someone like Terry Brooks has it down so thoroughly that his process is probably in no way what any aspiring author should attempt to use.
And also adding to the difference in approaches to editing will definitely be how prepared you are, and thoroughly you outline. If you use a sketchy outline, or carve it up 4-5 chapters ahead of where you are with only a general arc in mind, this equals more edits, and perhaps necessary while you go so that you hone a precise path to where you are going. Whereas if you tediously outline (while still leaving room for creativity of course) you are much less susceptable to getting off track and needing to bring it back. Some of my best passages I have cut b/c they weren't where my book needed to go. I've just kept ahold of them and i know i can cannablize for the future.
On a side note: Outline as much as you can. The contrary may work for Stephen King (with dissenting opinions on how well) but we aren't stephen king.
If something doesn't add up to you, you can bet the reader will catch it twice as quick! Thats why its so necessary to aim for that "Seamless" story shawn speaks of.
The more incongruency's you have in a story the more the reader will step back and say, wait, what? and if this happens often enough they'll become completely disengaged and lose interest.
well, its midnight, and i'm rambling. Hey J David, if you want shoot me an email and tell me what ur story is about s_m_burk@hotmail.com.
this place is starting to look like a ghost town!
I'll have an update later today. And it's an interesting one, I think...
Post a Comment
<< Home