Posts Tagged Writing
Tools for Writing 1
Recently I have been trying out a new piece of writing software and, in due course, I’m going to write a review of it, but first the obvious question. Why not use Microsoft Word?
The answer to that question is not simply answered by saying that MS Office is expensive compared to alternatives (unless it’s bought for you by your company) and that it can be unstable (as evidenced by the periodic swearing on the internet when a .doc file becomes corrupted).
This last one is contentious. People will say that it wasn’t Word’s fault, but rather some other software; a driver, an operating system issue, some malware infection. They say you should do backups, save copies, be more careful. They may be right, but it’s no comfort to the person who just lost a piece of writing that they cannot easily reproduce. Ah, they will say, but you configure auto-save, and that backs it up for you.
Well, yes, and no. I could wear body armour all the time in case I trip and hurt myself, but I don’t because I don’t expect to fall over. Nor do I expect a word processor to corrupt my work. I shouldn’t need to automatically back up every two minutes in case that happens. It shouldn’t happen. In contrast I used a different piece of software to write 150,000 word novel editing multiple versions over a five year period. It never crashed once.
MS Word is a general purpose word processor aimed at the business user. It’s an excellent tool if you want to write a letter, compile a report, knock up a CV, make some notes or write a business proposal. If you are writing a report and it goes over 20,000 words you are not being sufficiently concise. If you have a CV of over 2,000 words you are going to be asked to shorten it. These are not long documents, and MS Word handles them well enough.
On top of being a capable word processor, MS Word adds in additional functionality. It supports table structures, language changes, structural elements, tables of contents, embedded spreadsheets, preconfigured styles and hundreds of other features. It is almost a desktop publishing platform. It integrates with other software and collaborates with SharePoint and Office platforms. It’s a corporate communications platform. Indeed, the product has become so overwhelming rich in functionality that by the time Word 2003 was released, Microsoft were hiding features from the user to reduce the impression of complexity.
These features aren’t much use to a fiction writer, though. What writers mainly want is text, and lots of it. One font is enough, in the same size, with bold and italic. Maybe another for titles or emphasis, but that’s it. We want to configure line-spacing as single, 1.5 or double.
Then we want the ability to handle large volumes of text. A business report might be 5,000 words. Your dissertation may be 20,000 words. But if you’re writing a novel you want to be able to easily handle over 200,000 words. This is an order of magnitude greater in size, but in computing terms we are talking about a file that is less that 2Mb in size – not exactly taxing.
What happens when you’re typing in Word and it autosaves a 200,000 word document?
If you’re lucky, it stops responding for a while and then bursts back into life, streaming the characters you were typing while it autosaved onto the screen like a ghostly typist. If you’re not lucky, it crashes. If you have live spell-check activated, it stalls when that engages too, and when it grammar checks, should you be foolish enough to have that enabled. Insert something at the beginning of the document and the entire thing may repaginate.
Of course, you can turn these features off in the Options screen, but if you do, it’s off. You no longer have autosave or live spell-check. You can trigger spell-check manually, but make sure you save first because it may just crash. As documents get larger, the lag becomes more of a problem. It’s not because of the hardware – we’re talking about a 2Mb file here – it’s the way it works.
Many writers break their work up into chunks. For me, chapters works quite well. Have you tried working on nine different files at once in Word? How about thirty? There’s no way to know what’s saved and what’s not, which document is which, and where you are in the stack of files. The titles on the icons get compressed to the point of unreadability and the desktop is a mess of open windows. Then autosave kicks in, resulting in a potential multi-file pile-up of epic proportions.
Let’s assume we persevere. Open up twenty files, each containing a chapter and rename the character we previously called Jim to Charles wherever it is used in those twenty files. This is exactly the sort of thing a writer is wont to do.
Search across multiple files? No. We have to go through them one by one. Ah, say the Windows enthusiasts, you can use Windows Desktop Search for that, or Google Desktop Search, or something similar. But there’s a problem with that. We only want to change the name Jim to Charles in the current version of thirty files that we’re working on. We have twelve other earlier drafts, each with their own set of files, saved on the hard drive and we want to leave those alone. A desktop search finds every instance in every file and it’s down to us to find which ones need changing. Another nightmare.
The truth is that MS Word simply isn’t intended for writing novel length work. It’s not that it’s bad software – it’s very good software, as evidenced by the millions of users who use it for business and domestic tasks worldwide, but it’s not intended for writing books. It is simply not the right tool for the job.
Luckily there are a number of tools which do this job very well indeed. Many of them are priced for a budget pocket or free to use, which is a bonus, and all of them are aimed at writers. Over the next few weeks I will take a look at some of them in the context of Tools for Writing. Hopefully you’ll find one that’s sympathetic to what you’re trying to do.
Genre and Taxonomy
I’ve been thinking about genre lately. It came up as a panel topic at PCon and there was a lively discussion about what constituted genre and how that affected books. Cheryl Morgan came up with an erudite and academic-sounding definition. I wish I’d written it down.
One of the conclusions of the panel was that there are two types of genre, marketing genre and category genre. The purpose of marketing genre is pretty obvious. If bookshops had to read every book before they could stick it on the shelves then they would never sell any books. By allowing the marketing department of the publishers to categorise the books for them, they can appropriately shelve the books so that people can find and purchase them. Marketing genre allows readers to enter bookshops and limit their browsing to a part of the bookshop, saving time and making it more likely that they will purchase a book. At least that’s the theory.
Category genre is harder to pin down. I think we can all agree that Robert Ludlum’s Bourne series are thrillers, whereas Jane Austin is classic literature. The problems come when the boundaries blur. I’ve previously posted a recommendation for Phil Rickman’s – Merrily Watkins books, which are crime/mystery with horror elements. Another strong recommendation is for Janet Evanovich’s – Stephanie Plum novels, starting with One for the Money. I can’t tell you whether it’s a crime/mystery, thriller or comedy. All I can say is that while reading it on the train, the person sitting opposite tapped me on the wrist and asked me what the book was, I’d been laughing so much. At the same time, some of the later books in the same series are genuinely creepy.
The concept of marketing genre leads us to create a hierarchy where there are major categories like Crime, Romance, SFF and then Fantasy breaks down into High/Epic Fantasy, Urban Fantasy, Dark Fantasy, Paranormal Romance, etc. but as with the books mentioned above, the hierarchy degrades where the genres blur. You can end up with Thomas Harris: The Silence of the Lambs (Crime or Horror?) next to Carl Hiaasen: Hoot (Mystery/Comedy) – two very different books.
I’ve already said that the purpose of marketing genre is to sell books. If you like a book then you are likely to purchase another work by that author or by another writer in a similar vein. Some authors even change names when writing in different genres. I found out why they do this when I picked up a Janet Evanovich novel on the strength of her Stephanie Plum books and found it was a fairly lightweight romance. Let’s just say it wasn’t what I expected.
Some suggest that genre should be broadened out. I’ve heard people say that SF and Fantasy should be under Speculative Fiction, but it’s a writer’s job to speculate. The one question authors continually ask is: What happens if? There is as much speculation in John Le Carré: The Honourable Schoolboy as there is in Arthur C Clarke’s Rendezvous With Rama, so where does that leave us?
Category genre is misleading. It invites us to divide books using an taxonomy – comedy, suspense, horror, romance, fantasy – but these are not genres, they are the the tools of writing and a good story may use all of them, forging them into new alloys of meaning and understanding.
Readers, though, want to be able to find books that they will enjoy, and marketing genre allows us to support this to a limited extent. Category genre, on the other hand, serves to perpetuate a reading habit that continually narrows into sub-genres. Readers are encouraged through category genre to read everything in a narrow field until it is exhausted. This can lead ultimately to a sense of dissatisfaction, since by limiting choice to a narrow field the books become formulaic and repetitive. This is especially true where a sub-genre, or a sub-sub-genre becomes highly fashionable as in the case of kick-ass girls in leather pants with vampires, which can be traced through Urban Fantasy to Contemporary Fantasy to SF & F in the genre hierarchy.
When I went into Foyles in London recently, a very well-respected bookshop, I was shocked to discover an entire wall of Young Adult Teen Vampire novels. I was also surprised to discover that Waterstones seems to have re-branded Horror into Dark Fantasy. This is great for the teen vampire lovers but leaves some excellent Horror writers without a natural home. Incidentally, it did amuse me to see Joe Hill’s – Heart Shaped Box among the Paranormal Romance. Someone is in for a nasty surprise.
I am guessing that the wall of YA vampire books will be a temporary affair. Once the rush to be the next twilight dies down, the shelf will vanish like a vampire in a tanning booth, but the re-branding of Horror to Dark Fantasy may persist, and though it will be greeted by some with trepidation (What, no Horror?) it may not be a bad thing in the long term. The books from the Horror shelves will be re-shelved elsewhere, perhaps next to a Carl Hiaasen or a John Le Carré and some readers will see them for the first time, and maybe pick them up and give them a try, breathing new life in to the readership.
Can we contemplate a world of books without genre? If you want to try this for yourself, go along to Daunt Books in Marylebone High Street in London. Apart from the charming architecture, it is worth visiting because it is not organised into genre, but by geography. In the section on Italy you will find books on Tuscan Cooking alongside Lindsey Davies’ – Falco Mysteries. In the books on the United States you are likely to find Raymond Chandler’s – The Big Sleep, next to Jim Butcher’s – Harry Dresden novels. It’s a refreshing experience.
For myself, I try not to be limited or constrained by genre, while respecting genre boundaries and delivering on my readers expectations. It makes my books difficult to file, but hopefully interesting to read.
Reviews and Reviewers
Posted by Mike in Books and Reviews on February 26, 2010
Reviews and reviewers are both the saviour and damnation of writers. Without reviews, our work will go unnoticed and our efforts unrewarded, but like a two-edged sword, it cuts both ways.
Last year, Angry Robot Books held a launch party at Forbidden Planet in London, which was great fun, thanks to the efforts of all concerned. It was strange for me, though, because I didn’t have anything to promote other than myself. My debut novel was still a couple of months from publication and the best I could offer was an ARC or two and there were no-where near enough of those to go around. In a way, though, it was liberating as it freed me to chat to visitors and authors alike and made for a most engaging and enjoyable afternoon.
So, when someone sidled up to me and asked, “Have you had your first reviews yet?” I was slightly taken aback. I explained that the book had only just gone to the printers.
“You wait,” he said, in a manner of someone watching storm clouds bank up on the horizon.
He proceeded to quote a review he had received for a piece of his own writing, at length, word-for-word. The comments were fiercely critical, vindictive and insulting. ”You always remember the bad ones,” he whispered to me.
It was a strange comment to make at a launch party and the debut of a writing career and it struck me that he was carrying these comments around in his heart and that periodically, like a penitent monk, he would pick up the review and beat himself with it. Whether this was an incentive to improve his writing, or a way of dealing with his own insecurities I do not know, but I resolved not to carry bad reviews along with me. I would leave them behind me and move on.
Since then I have been fortunate enough to be blessed with some very positive reviews, but I have also learned something about the nature of reviews themselves.
The truth is that when you release a story into the wild, something strange happens. The characters that you invented, the situation that you placed them in, is recreated in someone else’s head and what used to be yours becomes theirs. This is fundamental to the suspension of disbelief and, as an author, you rely on this to support your narrative. What you imagined, though, isn’t what they see, so what they are reviewing is not what you imagined. It is coloured by their experience and tinged with their memories, prejudiced with their loves and hates.
I read yesterday a stunning review for J. Robert King’s, Angel of Death on DaveBrendon’s Fantasy and SciFi. Shortly afterwards, I saw a tweet from J Robert King saying, “The book *is* brutal, but Dave clearly got what I was after.”
As an author, I don’t think that you can ask more from a reviewer than to ‘get’ what we are after. If the reviewer liked or disliked the book, if it horrified or amused them, caused them to stay up late or throw the book at the wall, that is down to their personal experience of the book. They have made the effort to place themselves in an open state of mind that was receptive to the authors imaginings.
In contrast, as authors, it is down to us to set out those imaginings in such a way that it doesn’t matter whether the reader has comparable experience or even knowledge of the situation. It is our role to create that situation for them so that they may experience it for themselves. If we can achieve that, then the reviews that follow will be as glowing as the one mentioned here.
SF Site Interview
Posted by Mike in Books and Reviews on February 10, 2010
As the title implies, it was my great pleasure to be interviewed recently for SF Site by the lovely and charming Sandy Auden for her column: News Spotlight. The full text of the interview is here, but since then I’ve had more time to reflect on my answers and, consequently, wanted to share a small extract and expand a little on what I meant.
Sandy asked me the question, “Would you change anything if you could go back?” My answer looked back at Sixty-One Nails and forward to Road to Bedlam and other work.
…Somewhere, then, I will have shot myself in the foot. I don’t know where yet, but I’m going to have written something that means that the story cannot go where I want it to go. That’s the thing I would go back and change, when I find out what it is.
It was a good question, and I hope not too glib an answer. I was reminded of an interview with Ian Rankin who writes the extremely successful Inspector Rebus novels. When asked what he thought he might have done differently, he said he would have made Rebus younger and a less senior policemen at the beginning, giving him more scope to develop as he grew older. I wondered at the time whether his stories of a more optimistic, healthier, less cynical Rebus would have been anywhere near as successful. Rankin’s readers love Inspector Rebus for who he is, not who he was.
I was also asked in the interview why I chose to show so little of Niall’s background before the adventure started. If we knew him better at that point, wouldn’t we be more aware of the changes in him as they happened? My answer talks about how Niall’s life has become a cycle of work, eat and sleep, how he is disconnected from life and how dying really doesn’t make that much difference to him. His story starts when he dies.
It’s interesting for me to look back and see that Blackbird does not give him a choice. She doesn’t ask him whether he wants to be revived. If she had, I wonder what he might have said? His life had lost all meaning, all hope. Maybe he doesn’t want to go on? But then something truly extraordinary happened, something he couldn’t possibly have predicted.
He is shown another life.
To some extent, I think this is the same as with Rebus – where he was before isn’t as interesting. If we saw Niall when he was at work, when he was watching TV in his flat, when he dried his dishes and turned the lights out to go to bed on his own, would that help us to understand who he could become? Niall’s choice isn’t whether he dies from a heart attack or not, Blackbird doesn’t give him that option. She pulls him back into life and shows him, however briefly, a very different sort of existence to the one he’s used to.
For me, the real story begins when he decides he wants to keep it.
New Year Greetings
Posted by Mike in Events Schedule on January 18, 2010
Happy New Year. Yes, I know it’s the middle of January and I know that everyone else stopped saying that a week ago, but I’ve been busy, so I would like to wish you all a happy, healthy and prosperous 2010 now, while there’s still some January left.
The reason my new year greeting is a smidgen tardy is that I’ve been absorbed in finishing The Road to Bedlam, which is the sequel to Sixty-One Nails. It follows Niall and Blackbird in the aftermath of Sixty-One Nails, and as anyone who read the taster will know (it’s included in the back of book one), it’s also about Niall’s daughter, Alex, and what happens when she comes into her power.
I thought I would start 2010 with a recap of the schedule as the question that I am most often asked now is: When can I read book two? Bearing in mind that schedules are subject to change at the publishers, the printers and at the retailers, and by me if I don’t hurry up and get the darned book finished, here are the dates for your diary:
- June 2010 – Sixty-One Nails is released in the USA and Canada
- July 2010 – The Road to Bedlam is released in the UK and Australasia
- August 2010 – The Road to Bedlam is released in the US and Canada
As I get more precise information on release dates, I will update you, but it looks like being a heck of a summer for Niall and Blackbird – in more ways than one. In the meantime, I will keep you up to date with progress and I’ll be posting some info on the development of the Courts of the Feyre as we progress into the year.
With that, I’ll wish you a joyous, healthy, wealthy and peaceful 2010.
