Showing posts with label failure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label failure. Show all posts

Monday, June 4, 2012

Visual Storyboarding (pt 2): By Hook or By Crook

A couple days late, but here it is - Part Two in my current series on Visual Storyboarding!

(Didn't catch the first post? Look for it here.)

Now - to cut to the chase!!!


The Hook That Grabs You

Part of knowing how to visually storyboard is to really grab on to one detail: How did the story come to you in the first place?

Of course there are myriad ways this happens to any writer. You overhear a snatch of conversation. You see one remarkable person in a crowd. You have a wacky day (or a glorious vacation, or some other event) and think: “You know, this could have gone another way…”

Sometimes the idea coalesces from various bits you’ve gathered from books you’ve read or movies you’ve seen. Sometimes you’re ambushed by an idea entirely.

My current project, Castle 8, literally ambushed me while I was driving home from an after-Christmas dinner with friends on December 26, 2010. More specifically, I was ambushed by four brothers. I knew their first names, I knew their faces, I even had a general idea of their (very strong!) personalities. They just needed a last name and a story to wrap around them.

I went home and immediately got out pencil and paper, and started hashing out who these four young men were that had crowded into my car during the long dark drive – leaped, as it were, out of my imagination and into my reality.

I was hooked. More than that – I had my hook.

If It Hooks You, It Hooks Your Audience

Granted, Castle 8 is nowhere near completion yet, though I have made it my personal goal to get it polished and query-worthy well before the end of the year. Expanding on the idea was fun, and it led me into all sorts of interesting narrative quirks that absolutely thrilled my nerdy, writerly soul. But as I worked on it, I found that I kept returning to the original idea that hooked me in the first place – the brothers themselves.

Usually, when we talk about what hooks a reader into a story, it comes down to: What was it that hooked YOU in the first place? The situation? The place? A specific character?

For me, it was the four brothers: Greg, Errol, Finn and March. They were so real to me that I kept going back to them as the central focus of my tale. Naturally it followed that the tale itself became a character-driven story.

This was confirmed even in the responses I received from my first round of beta-readers. Though the narrative was choppily rendered, with detours it didn’t need and even a few unnecessary characters, everyone honed in on the four brothers as the one thing that drew them in.

Everyone had their favorite brother, just like everyone pointed to another brother they thought was weak or “unnecessary” ~ though interestingly enough, no one ever pointed to the same brother as the “throwaway.”  I chalked that up to my bad writing and figured it was okay to keep all four of them. But it meant that I had to sift through some serious plot holes in the story.

The whole process was a priceless lesson for me. It taught me that if the hook was good enough to hook me – it’s good enough to hook my audience. Even if I fall on my nose during the actual telling of it.

Visualizing Your Hooks

That realization brought me back to the big problem I had with my narrative: it was, in short, a jumbled-up mess. And that’s putting it politely.

So what was my problem? I had visualized the Swackhammer brothers so well that I hadn’t taken the time to visualize the rest of my story. I knew it happened in the future, but a plausible future, based on technologies and machines we have now. I had an intuitive understanding of some of it, but not a lot of specific knowledge.

Scratch that. I had NO CLUE what I was doing in creating this world.

I knew the Swackhammer brothers were where they needed to be. I just didn’t have a clear idea of what that being entailed – what it looked like, smelled like, how it all fit together. Heck, I didn’t even have a map to know where everything belonged!

No wonder the narrative sagged so brutally. I had my hook, but hadn’t taken the time to fully visualize it. ALL of it.

Saved From the Black Hole

End result: in January of this year, I put Castle 8 on the back burner. WAY on the back burner. I was so discouraged with the narrative mess it had become that I figured it would be years before I could get it out of its black hole.

Boy was I wrong.

In the past four months, I stumbled across a couple of tools – some very old school, others very new – that have enabled me to get a lock on the full three-dimensional aspect of my story. I know what it looks like. I know what it feels like. I have my map. I have sounds and notes and photos and all sorts of creative detritus that has given me a tighter visual control on my project.

I’m currently rewriting Castle 8 as we speak, from the ground up.

It’s hard, of course – but only in the tenacity required to keep at something I’ve already written before. Because now I have all I need to make the story come alive – not just the brothers, but everything that surrounds them, including the dangers and locales to which future installments will take them.

How did I manage that? Well – I hate to be a tease, but that’s a subject for next time. But the next update WILL deal exclusively with the tools I’ve used to really build up my project.

Heck, I’ll even post photos. Lots of photos. Doesn’t that sound like fun?

Cannot wait to share the next step – it’s probably the most fun, if you ask me.

But tell me – what do YOU do when you realize you haven’t fully realized something in your story world? I’d love to hear of other’s techniques. I know I haven’t thought of everything.

Got a comment or idea? Let me know in the comments below!
And as always – thanks for reading!

Thursday, December 29, 2011

AT: Hard Yet Encouraging Truths, Pt 1


Welcome to the inaugural edition of Agent Tweets, a weekly post that highlights and responds to
 publication-centric comments from agents and editors, gleaned on Twitter.

NOTE: I will not put up the names of said agents and editors, so don't ask who they are. 
The tweets posted here are indicative of what I am seeing across the spectrum.
These tweets happen to be the most compellingly worded variations. 

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

A few weeks ago I announced my intention to roll out this weekly review of revealing tweets from editors and agents, and received a tremendous amount of feedback. Based on your responses to the topics presented, I decided to begin our AT journey with the topic: "Hard Yet Encouraging Truths" for writers. I'm glad, because I think all of us not-yet-published writers could really use some encouragement right now - even if it stings a bit in the application.

So let's cut to the chase, shall we? Here is the first installment of at least two "Hard Yet Encouraging Truths" episodes for the would-be published author.

Hard Yet Encouraging Truth #1: Sometimes you still hook ‘em – even if you still get a rejection.

Sometimes when I am reading a ms, I know it will be a no but I still feel compelled to keep reading & see how it ends.

There really are times I stare at a query, totally on the fence, torn between rejecting and requesting. Make your query the BEST you can.// I just don't have the time to request everything that sounds "pretty good." I want projects that get me SUPER excted!

I find these two tweets to make interesting bookends. The second one addresses the query; the first one addresses the manuscript itself. This means that would-be writer #2 got as far as the query process and almost got a request for a full manuscript. Would-be-writer #1 did get the request for a full, and then the effort sagged.

Why this is hard: There's probably nothing more frustrating than knowing you "almost" had an agent hooked (which is probably one of the reasons behind form rejection letters).

Why this is encouraging: Both tweets indicate the book ideas were good, even excellent - just not compelling. But the very indecision of the second agent, and the fact that the first agent felt curious enough to read through to the end of an "okay" manuscript - such responses hint at manuscripts that, with a little hard work and meticulous revising, could go from "pretty good" to the "super excited" quality work they're looking for.

Bottom line: How to improve the manuscript itself is fodder for a thousand other posts, on this blog and elsewhere on the web. But the query? The secret to overcoming that obstacle lies in the second tweet - the urge to make your query the best it can possibly be. For more hints on how to manage that, you can visit Query Shark, Query Tracker, or this thread in which twenty potential queries were critiqued openly by an agent. (NOTE: This link will take you to the first entry; use the side menu to access the others.)



Hard Yet Encouraging Truth #2: There is life after failure.

Sometimes it takes a while to discover the story you're trying to tell. Sometimes it takes an entire failed book. Sometimes two. That's OK.

Persistence isn’t an issue when you’ve just started - it's needed after the 20th & 200th rejection

If you're struggling with rejection, repeat after me: I have what it takes, and will not be discouraged. People are rejected for many reasons//And as an an agent, ONE THIRD of my clients were rejected at one point.... by ME. They revised and wowed me with their work.


I'm rejecting a lot of really great manuscripts this week. Just because it isn't The One for me doesn't mean it won't find that perfect home

Why this is hard: Two failed books? 200th rejection? What? ....ouch. Just....OUCH.

Why this is encouraging: No one likes to be told up front that you might have to submit multiple bad books before unearthing your winner. Even more unsavory is the idea of getting 200 rejections without a single offer. Yet none of these agents (four different ones, by the way) say to give up after multiple flops, or 200 rejections. The fourth tweet, specifically, indicates that rejections are sometimes a matter of preference or situation - that they really are great manuscripts, but just haven't yet found the right home.

Bottom Line: The third tweet, I think, is the key. Therein lies buried four important steps for pushing past failure (real or perceived) and on to success:

     (1) Don't lose your vision, and don't get discouraged. This is easier said than done, but those who persevere are the ones who eventually see their work in print.

     (2) Remember that many factors may have played into your rejection. A rejection does not necessarily mean your work is inherently bad. It may be that it is an "out of season" text (more on that for a later Agent Tweets report). Perhaps that agent just signed someone else with a similar idea. There are other reasons, I'm sure. (NOTE: For more insights into the agent mindset, I would recommend following @agentgame on Twitter - they are an agent's assistant, but they often tweet valuable insights on the book agent industry.)

     (3) Rejection is an opportunity to grow, not to sulk. If I posted all the tweets about ill-mannered writers who responded to rejection emails with profanity-laced fury, you'd be reading from now to Easter. Dabblers throw temper tantrums. Writers recalibrate and act accordingly. And then they get published.

     (4) Sometimes you may still be accepted by the same agent - if you bide your time and do what is wise. Please note that agents generally will state specifically if they'd like you to revise your work and then resubmit. Make sure that you check submission guidelines for any agent you query.


Questions? Comments? Insights?
Feedback is appreciated!