The Universal Law of Action and Reaction

How would you react to being punched in the face? (image courtesy of andysteel at Free Images)

Newton's third law of motion is that for every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. This is a physical law of the universe. Unbreakable. Therefore, generally expected. Even when we aren't dealing with motion, we live in a world of cause and effect. I hit you, and it might be a hundred different things, but there are effects; you're pissed off at me, your nose bleeds, you realise you've been an idiot, etc.

Breaking The Rules:

Of course when writing we get to break the rules all the time. We can have people fly or jump over tall buildings in a single bound. But when we break these rules we always need to give an explanation. That explanation may be as simple as 'magic', but it is an explanation all the same. When we don't, our readers get annoyed. We accept Harry Potter flying around on broomsticks, but would get annoyed if Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice suddenly did, if we didn't give a good enough explanation.

So as writers we are usually pretty good at the big ones; they are flying because there's magic, they are time traveling because they have a machine. Simple. 

However, it's amazing how frequently even good writers break some of the more basic rules of the universe, such as cause and effect, without thinking there needs to be an explanation. Unfortunately, they are wrong. The audience always expects an action to have a reaction. 

Action and Reaction:

It is a rare thing for a man to walk into a room with a gun and absolutely nothing happen without some explanation. In some situations even standing up causes a reaction. 

'Where are you going?' The girlfriend pouts. 

The boyfriend sighs and sits down again. 

Action, reaction, re-reaction. That's how life works. 

So it is a lot more noticeable than obviously some writers think when we don't have a strong pattern of action and reaction. 

Today I started reading Dragonkeeper by Carole Wilkinson, which is an award winning YA book. It took me a while to work out why it was irritating me so much. Then I read this section and it finally dawned on me;

[We are following a young girl called Ping and the dragon Danzi (shape-changed to look like an old man) who are trying to get to the Ocean. They believe they have escaped the clutches of the dragon hunter Diao and have just accepted hospitality in a village only to find Diao is also there.]

She knew he had recognised her. He looked at the old man with the greenish face and the long side whiskers. His half-smile became whole.

"That girl is an evil sorceress," Diao shouted. "The old man is a shape-changing demon."

The villagers stared at him in surprise.

"Don't just stand there. Seize them!"

The entire population of the village left their chores to see what the fuss was about.

"I've come across them before," Diao contined.

The villagers looked from the young girl and her frail grandfather to the grimy man with the unpleasant voice. They gathered protectively around Ping and Danzi, blocking any chance of escape.

"Don't trust them because they look innocent."

Hua [Ping's rat] chose that moment to reposition himself in the folds of Ping's gown.

"See for yourselves," said Diao. "The girl has creatures living in her gown."

The villagers' eyes widened as they did indeed see something moving beneath the girl's clothing. They took a step away from Ping and towards Diao.

"And the old man can't stand the touch of iron," said the dragon hunter.

One of the villagers picked up an iron scythe and help it up against the old man's arm. Danzi groaned with pain. The villagers backed further away.

"I know their ways," said Diao. "I will protect you from these evil demons."

The dragon hunter lunged forward and struck Danzi with his sword. Danzi screamed and fell to his knees. His cry was like a screech of tearing metal.

Diao strode over and grabbed Ping. The villagers shouted encouragement to the foul-smelling man.

"We'll give you all our money if you get rid of the demons," they promised.

Diao was trying not to look too pleased. His mouth had returned to its usual sneer, but his eyes glittered with pleasure.

Instead of the comfortable house in which Ping had imagined they would spend the night, the villagers pushed them into a pigsty... [goes into long description of the pigsty]

So, anyone else see the huge problem with this scene?

What on earth were Ping and Danzi doing the whole time? Where was their reaction? The whole scene is action, action, action by Diao, disproportionately weak reaction, reaction, reaction from the villagers, and absolutely nothing from our protagonists. 

If you are anything like me, you'll want to shout at Ping and Danzi 'Do Something!', while also getting irritated at the author for being lazy. Because it is lazy writing. The author obviously had an end point she wanted to get to, and didn't take the time to properly plot out how to get there, or even consider whether her characters would get into such a situation.

Further, when we get to the point where so little reaction has happened that a new action cannot begin, a complete coincidence is brought in to make up the gap:

"Don't trust them because they look innocent." 

What exactly does Diao expect this accusation will accomplish? Oh, right, nothing, which is exactly what happens. So how do we move forward? Unrelated, coincidental action to kick start the scene again.

Hua [Ping's rat] chose that moment to reposition himself in the folds of Ping's gown.

"See for yourselves," said Diao. "The girl has creatures living in her gown."

This scene could easily have been remedied if the author had remembered that every action needs not only a reaction, but an equal and opposite reaction. To be of equal size, the reaction needs to be from the person with the most to gain/lose from the action. For us, it's Ping and Danzi, which is why it's so irritating they are mute and motionless the entire time. 

Not only is having no reactions unrealistic, it weakens the writing in two important ways. 

Conflict and Character:

As mentioned in the previous post (on creating a dynamic story) stories are moved forward by conflict. Actions that have no reaction are by definition 'conflictless'. Similarly, reactions which are just what the initiator expected are not 'opposite' reactions, and do not create conflict. Instead, they create dull reading, like listening to 'yes men' all the time. 

It is only when we have opposite reactions that we get into the meaty parts of writing. Opposite reactions open up opportunities. As seen in the scene above, with no reaction, no conflict, the story can't move forward. But when the characters respond in a way that the initiator doesn't expect, then there is another chance to react and keep everything moving forward. 

The other important consequence of good action and reaction is character portrayal. True character can only be shown by the choices the individual makes. Reaction is the perfect opportunity to demonstrate this. When faced with someone accusing her of being a sorceress, how she responds tells us a lot about who she is. It through these reactions that we can escape 'telling' the audience about the main character and starting 'showing' them the reality.

There Is Always A Reaction:

Maybe when confronted by the dragon hunter our main character is so scared and uncertain that she doesn't make a move, but there is still a reaction. She goes from feeling happy and welcomed to suddenly fearful and petrified. Her limbs have gone from moving easily to being locked into place, or weak and about to collapse. These are all reactions, and they all tell us something about the main character.

If you do manage to write a piece of action to which there is no reaction you have two choices: either explain why there is no reaction (he looks around and realises everyone has left the room), or delete it because it's a waste of space. 

Conclusion:

Action - reaction is the basis of all human experience. We expect it, so don't disappoint. 

When in doubt, use Newton's third law to guide you into conflict and character revelation, because it's the easiest way to make a great story. 

If you want to, why not try rewriting the scene above to see if you can make it more action packed. Can you give Ping different reactions which reveal her to be different types of person? Maybe in one she's aggressive and like a small terrier that never lets go, but in another she's wise and thoughtful, using knowledge of human nature to turn the villagers against Diao. It's all in how she responds.

Creating A Dynamic Story

Conflict Is Always Exciting. Image courtesy of Dave Edmonds at freeimages.com

Boring, insipid writing is on the rise. The ease of writing a book on a computer means more people are putting out words which are better left unsaid. Overall, I would much rather read bad but exciting writing, than technical okay but dull writing. And sadly, over the past few weeks, I feel I've been adding to the collection of uninspired words in the universe. The only benefit of this is that I've now come to realise some of the fundamentals of dull writing and how to turn it around. 

The first is lack of conflict. 

In Story, (which, yes, I'm still reading after about a month, because I can only get through a page or two before I have to stop and reassess all I know about my writing and the stories I've created so far!) Robert McKee argues that stories are moved along by conflict. Internal conflict, external conflict, it doesn't matter. A gap needs to open up between the character's expectations of what's going to happen and what does happen. This creates conflict. 

According to my wonderful source, the Internet, conflict as a verb is to be incompatible or at variance. We as writers need to make everything around our main character somehow at variance with him/her/it. We all know that we need a major climax at the end, usually some at the beginning to start things off, and then probably two turning points and a mid point conflict. However this is not quite what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about conflict in every scene, almost every line of writing. 

Take dialogue as an example. 

Has anyone else ever written really easy dialogue? It seems to just flow straight out onto the page. But when you go back and read it, it doesn't seem to have much punch? 

Generally it's because all the characters are agreeing with what the others are saying. They all understand exactly what the other means, and say exactly what our main character expects. This is easy writing, because you know what you want to happen and it happens, then you can then easily move onto the next point. It is also very dull writing. 

Instead, other characters need to say things that our main character doesn't expect. This creates conflict, tension, good reading. The only problem is that if we are inside the head of our main character, we might not expect it either. So we then have to stop and think from both sides, flicking backwards and forwards. It takes longer, is much more of a mental exercise, but creates a much more dynamic set of characters, situations and story. 

One of the prerequisites for this is knowing all the characters in a scene in more depth. 

Minor Characters:

I love my main character in every story I write. Sometimes it even becomes a bit weird, as I cry about the awful things I have to do to them and promise them faithfully that I will get them out the other side stronger and better than before. (This might be one of the reasons I could never write The Hunger Games, as how Collins could write the final book in the series leaving her main character permanently mentally scarred is beyond me. I admit Tolkien did it, but then he sent Frodo off to the West, and that made all things good again).

However, I have recently discovered that loving my main characters too much has led to some rather insipid writing. First is the natural desire to keep them away from conflict. Who would willing thrust their beloved child into a warzone? However, unless you want them never to be read, this is exactly what you need to do. 

The other problem is that I'm so in love with my main characters, I often see things completely from their perspective. I get into that childlike belief that everyone else in the world disappears when not interacting with my main character. In Virtually Ideal, which is in the first person, Laurie will be talking to her boyfriend (no hints on who he is!), then go off to work, have a few crises, and then ring him up again and find him still in the same emotional state as she left him in. 

BORING!

In real life people don't sit around doing nothing all day waiting for their girlfriends to call. They go off and have their own crises, victories, changes in emotional state. It is this element of the unexpected which makes using a phone so scary for a lot of us (come on, I can't be the only one that hates ringing people because I don't know what's going to be on the other end?) 

It is only through knowing what's going on in the lives of the other characters when they are not on the page that we can really introduce engaging conflict into the story. Laurie might ring up to cry on boyfriend's shoulder, only to find out that he's just had a really bad day and wants to have a cry on hers. Then Laurie is in conflict over fulfilling her own needs or his. This might lead to the realisation that she's selfish enough that she doesn't want to spend her time comforting him, she's just been using him for her own emotional needs. (Not saying that's what's happening, it's just an example). This then leads to a break up, or possibly personal growth in our character. But all this could only happen because we knew what was happening in the boyfriend's life as well.

Two Steps to Improve Conflict:

So I'm now incorporating two steps into my writing to make sure that I consciously consider these aspects. 

 

The first is in my warm up (which has now become totally indispensable to me. I can't imagine not taking this time beforehand to work out ideas, see my last post on the power of the warm up). Knowing which scene I'm going to be working on in the main session, I take the time in the warm up to plot out what my other characters have been doing prior to this, and to work out what expectations they are coming into the scene with. What do they want to happen?  

It's come as a real surprise sometimes that my other characters don't really want to go along with whatever I've planned for my main character. They happen to be just as selfish and self involved as I am about Laurie. Weird, huh? 

The second step is in dialogue. I always thought I was awesome at dialogue, because it always came so naturally. Now I'm realising that often I'm missing a lot of the potential conflict, and I'm just using it as a tool to get across what I want to happen. So now I'm consciously slowing down my writing of dialogue and developing multiple personalities. 

Dialogue really needs to be a harsh battle of wills, a take and take of selfish personalities. Writing it should be like being an actor in a one man play. I jump from one side of the table to the other, playing both characters, not letting either one overpower the other. Only it happens in my head. Usually. 

However, this does take a lot more effort. Main character puts forward a statement, question, whatever. Then as the write I stop, listen to the statement from the mind set of character two, run that through their wants and desires, and then put back and answer. Repeat process. Ideally I would do this with every line of dialogue. But there is a slight short cut you can take.

A slightly faster way to do this is just to make sure that whatever the other person says is not what the main character expects. Sounds silly, but yields amazing results. You get to stay in the mindset of your main character, you just conflict with what they want to happen. 

Compare these two examples.

'Would you like a cup of tea?'

'Yes, thank you.'

'Biscuit?'

'No, I'm good.'

Totally boring. What do we find out about these two characters? Absolutely nothing, other than that they are reasonably polite.

'Would you like a cup of tea?'

'Tea? Really? It just seems so English.'

'I suppose it is. Coffee then?'

'Oh, I never drink coffee, it's bad for my chakras.'

Much more interesting, and gives more insight into each of the characters. When the other character isn't really important, then just having them conflict with the main character is enough. Of course they need to be consistent, but you don't always need to know they unconscious motivation. However, for more major characters, such as Laurie's boyfriend, a true understanding of what's going on in their heads is indispensable.

In real life we might spend time agreeing with people, but usually it's because we aren't really paying attention or want to avoid conflict. In a story, an individual character may want to avoid conflict, but you as the writer want to encourage it. Understand and use your minor characters to move the story forward by disagreeing with the main character. 

Update On Buffyworld:

I'm currently writing Episode 14 of Virtually Ideal, which was going to be the last episode. It might still be, it just depends on whether I can get everything wrapped up. I've been getting myself through longer writing session by promising myself I can write as fast as I want and it will all be edited and rearranged once I know the whole story. This has resulted in me not being held up with fear, but also finishing with a manuscript that is currently 164,000 words. However, I'm actually looking forward to the restructure (which would not have been possible without the entire first draft, as I had no idea about some of the things that have come up and turned out to be really good). I plan to use some of McKee's plotting advice to map it all out, then rework it from there.

Going the opposite way, I've started using McKee's scene analysis to map out from scratch Five Nights in Vienna (or Wien, I haven't decided whether I want to use the German name yet). I've got about half of it sorted out, but haven't really got a handle on my main character. So more exploration needed there before I start writing. 

Every now and again I do a bit of work on Bootcamp, particularly as great ideas for extra bits come up. But I'm mainly focused on finish the first drafts at the moment. 

And, I'm going to have to do a second edition of After The Winter. Typos aside, my grandmother's best friend has just pointed out to me that there is no Joker in Bridge (I was basing it on my knowledge of Five Hundred. My bad.) So I've promised I'll fix that up. 

Also, I got feedback from the Christian publisher about Sally Hunt. It was very sweet of her to take the time to give it. She's not interested in taking the manuscript as it is now, but has shown me a few areas I could tighten it up (eg. it's still a bit preachy, which I worked out from something McKee said, and too much telling instead of showing). So that's waiting to go under the knife as well. However, I'm happy that they are things I can fix up. And I have to admit that I was reading over the beginning the other day and realised that in the years since I first wrote it, I've learnt a lot about writing.

Finally I got an appraisal back about my great grandfather's story A Little Bit Of Leaven. It is currently entered in the Caleb Christian writing competition, so I will still wait to see how it does in that. The appraisal said that it is quite slow (which I fully admit it is, but partly on purpose), and that the third person omniscient POV (point of view) makes it feel very 'old fashioned'. Since it was written over half a century ago, I think that's fair. However, I don't know if I want to change that, because I think that's part of its unique selling proposition. People don't write like that these days, but a large percentage of the population grew up with that style, and have a nostalgic affection for it. But they pointed out that it is unlikely a modern publisher would want it. 

The question that raises is do I keep it as it is, but reduce its modern appeal, or re-write it in a contemporary voice which will undermine its authenticity as a historical document. 

It is, in part, a similar problem to what I have with After The Winter. I set it in 1920, so wrote it in a style appropriate to the setting. However, some people have complained about that, saying it should be written in a contemporary style.

What do you think? Should historical pieces still have a contemporary writing style, or should they try to be authentic to the period? (within reason, obviously, they still need to be readable.)

And anyone put their main characters into awful conflict recently? How has it worked out?

The Power Of The Warm-Up

Does anyone else give great advice and then not follow it themselves? Only me?

I've been editing my next writing book, The Five Day Writer's Bootcamp, and in it I stress the importance of a writing warm up. 

Had I actually been doing writing warm ups myself? No. 

Do I still firmly believe they are a good idea? Yes. 

So, for the past week I decided to implement a warm up before my sessions. It isn't long, probably 5 minutes, I don't really time it, I just go until I finish the idea and feel ready to write.

I decided that I would use the warm up to get to know my characters and story better. I know a lot of people feel that reading over what they did last session is warm up enough, or they spend time planning what they'll write today. I don't do that. I put absolutely no pressure on my warm up to be directly improving the story. Instead, it's a chance just to play and have fun before getting down to work. I want to give my genius time to say anything it wants to, even if it's not what I had planned. 

What did I actually do?

Well, I'm writing a chick-lit, so the first day I decided to put my girl and three main guys in a room and see what happened. I presented it as a cocktail party where the three men meet for the first time. It's never actually going to happen in the book in this way, but I wanted to see how they would react to each other. It gave me great insight into each of the men, and reinforced why I liked two of them over the third. (Though hasn't helped me choose which of the two she'll end up with. I'm 90% sure I know which one, but the other keeps being so darn sweet!)

The second day I decided to work out what was the worst possible thing I could do to my main character, and how would she react. If I made her lose her job and get kicked out of her apartment, would that be enough? No, she would feel she could still be supported by her family and friends. So I had to dig deep. Where is she prideful? What does she base her self esteem on? And how could I destroy that? It seems a cruel task, but it is a really good challenge to work out if you have a large enough climax, and ensures that you've really targeted the centre of the character. 

I've also spent time interviewing my characters, and mapping out how they could react to different events. I've asked them about this biggest fears, their deepest desires, and some of their answers have surprised me. I've put them in new situations, and I've got them to interact with other people they might never meet. All this so that when I start my writing session, I'm in tune with them.

And the result?

Well, aside from any potential plot twists and character info that usefully arises, taking out the time to warm up I still get more written per hour afterwards than I did using the entire time to add words to the manuscript. 

So, I highly recommend you give it ago. Get into it, and get to know your characters and setting. 

ROW 80 Goals:

Last week I set myself the challenge to write 5,000 per day. 

I am proud to announce that other than one day, I've succeeded! A few days have been only 4,600-4,800, but other days have been 5,400-5,800. So on average I'm ahead.

I'm now part way through episode 10. I'm on track to finish the first draft of all the episodes by the end of June. Not only that, but things have arisen that I could never have predicted. The tale has taken a bit of a twist, but it is such a compelling twist that I'm going to go back and rewrite it more fully into the tale in the second draft.

I would like to thank the warm ups for helping in achieving this goal. 

Though I've also not been to the gym for most of those days, but that was because I thought I was coming down sick. Still not feeling 100%, but with plenty of sleep and fluids I seem to be staving off a full blown attack. 

Goals for next week: 

Continue with the writing frenzy, but try and start going to the gym as well. 

I'm currently trying to read about five books at one time, so might need to focus down and finish one off at a time. I just can't decide which one!

What would you want to know about your characters, if they could tell you just one thing?

The Fear and Comfort Of A 90:10 Ratio

Do you ever have those instances where it feels like the universe is ganging up on you to make a point?

In the last week someone has been fiddling with my life to teach me the 90:10 Ratio, a rule I wouldn't otherwise subscribe to.

It started a few days ago when I was listening to a podcast on writing. The presenter was talking about drafting, and the need to overdraft and then cut back. I am, in general, happy with this rule. Stephen King says a second draft should be your first draft minus 10%. That's the sort of thing I'm talking about. You write a bit extra, then pare out the unnecessary words.

This is not what they were talking about. They mentioned Hemmingway. His basic approach was this (please excuse the language): 

“I write one page of masterpiece to ninety-one pages of shit. I try to put the shit in the wastebasket.” 

They were talking about writing so much you could throw 90% out and keep the good 10% (or about 1% in Hemmingway's case). That just seemed ridiculous to me. While I'm all for writing as training, the thought of having to write even 180,000 words to pare down to 90,000, a 2:1 ratio, seems too much.

Then I was reading Story by Robert McKee (which, if you were wondering, is really good. Highly recommended, even if you only want to write novels). McKee argues:

'If your finished screenplay contains every scene you've ever written, if you've never thrown an idea away, if your rewriting is little more than tinkering with dialogue, your work will almost certainly fail. No matter our talent, we all know in the midnight of our souls that 90 percent of what we do is less than our best. If, however, research inspires a pace of ten to one, even twenty to one, and if you then make brilliant choices to find that 10 percent of excellence and burn the rest, every scene will fascinate and the world will sit in awe of your genius.'

Admit it, don't you want the world to sit in awe of your genius?

Why does this 90:10 keep coming up? What's wrong with just editing 10% of it? What about the inspiration that's gone into that scene?

According to McKee, 'more often than not, inspiration is the first idea picked off the top of your head, and sitting on top of your head is every film you've ever seen, every novel you've ever read, offering cliches to pluck.' So he suggests that once you get an idea for a scene, you should then sketch out a list of five, ten fifteen different versions of that scene.

I find this idea a bit scary and overwhelming. Not only do you want me to write a novel, but you actually want me to write about ten novels and then perfect it into one?
Deep breaths, deep breaths.

But, on the other hand, it is liberating. When I'm drafting, it doesn't matter if 90% of what I write is crap. I just have to keep going and I'll be able to cut out all the stuff that isn't good later. It's by trying to write 100% perfectly every session that I get caught up. If I only need a success rate of 10% to be up there with Hemmingway, then I think I can do that. (Though don't be surprised if I start bring out novellas!)

The challenge now is to spend the time editing it down to that 10%. I have the growing fear that I may not have edited After The Winter as much as I should have. While a lot of people love it, I've also received the feedback that in parts it's slow and the language a bit flowery. My poor little criticism sensitive writer's soul wants to pull it off the shelves and hide it away forever. But, instead, I'm going to take my lesson learnt and see if the next book can be better. And the one after that. And maybe one day I will come back and do a second edition of ATW with all that I've learnt. But for now I feel I need to keep moving forward. (That is the one problem with self-publishing, very few people are brave enough to tell you you should hold it back just a bit longer. And even if they did, you often don't listen. Sorry Mum and Anna!).

So, I'm not sure I will go as far as the 91 to 1 or even 90 to 10 ratio just yet, but for Virtually Ideal I'm drafting out 14 episodes. I then plan to try and pare it back to 10 episodes, and then 7. I am going to overwrite to give myself more room to play, more ideas to choose from, and less cliches to get stuck in.

ROW 80
There are just three weeks left in June. My overambitious goal is to get all 14 episodes drafted by the end. I'm currently working on episode 8, so just over halfway. And I have no idea what's actually going to happen. I think I know which guy she's going to get in the end, but one of them keeps surprising me when I try to write him out. Also, her mother has just announced there is another big family secret, I just wish someone had told me this!

 So for this week, I'm aiming towards 5,000 words a day and an episode every 3 days. Wish me luck. (Yes, I do still have full time work, and it's the end of the term so everyone is tired and grumpy. But if I can make it through to the 27th of June, then I get three weeks holidays, though I have writing plans for July as well).

After July I'm going into editing mode again. I think.

I'm currently ahead in my reading challenge, but still working through The Aeneid and also Story. Though, while I read Story, I keep getting great ideas to put into Bootcamp, so that slows down the reading process a bit. But I'll hopefully finish one of these in the next week.


So, what's your genius to trash ratio?

Cure For Frustration

Over the last few days I've been doing a bit of research into being a literary agent and a book editor. No, not because I'm planning on moving to the other side of publishing. It's research for my serial. Laurie in Virtually Ideal starts off as an unpaid intern at a literary agency, and so I needed to know what exactly they do on a day to day basis, how networking with editors works, and what a new agent would need to learn. It's fascinating looking into exactly what they do, how much they get paid (or really don't) and how much work it all takes.

My research extended to include which parts of contracts agents need to be especially wary of, and why they need to double and triple check all royalty statements from publishing houses. (For all those without your own agent, or who want to understand some of the pitfalls better, I highly recommend you take the 10 minutes or so to read this article on Royalty Statements by Richard Curtis.)

Doing this research produced two effects in me. The first is that I feel sorry for publishing editors, but not at all sorry for publishing houses. The editors appear to be vastly exploited, working long hours for what is basically a graduate level pay. The publishing houses, probably their financial division, on the other hand appear to employ a number of very dodgy and at times possibly illegal activities. Between badly reported royalty earnings, misrepresenting sales, not declaring reserves and never paying back reserves, it all becomes a bit scary. I highly recommend all writers do their research into these things so they know what they should be looking for.

The second is something I've felt on a number of occasions; it is an overwhelming sense of frustration. Yesterday I found a perfect description of it by Adele Parks, now a best selling contemporary women's authors, in the Writers' and Artists' Yearbook 2013:

"I clearly remember, before I was published, standing in a Waterstones bookshop on Oxford Street, London, literally weeping in frustration as I stared at the plethora of published works; I wanted to know, what was the magic ingredient? Why were those books published and not mine?"

Writing and then getting published is a long process. Even if you write very quickly, the editing process, then the production process, then marketing and getting people to actually buy the books takes time. Even with self-publishing. And that can be frustrating. Frustrating when other people seem to have it much easier, and their books aren't even that good! (I totally accept J.K.Rowlings, her books were wonderful, she turned them all out on time, and she managed to maintain the quality. Other people, however...)

Reading about the publishing industry, how much chance it appears to be, how difficult it all is, and how long it takes left me feeling like I would never eventually 'make it'. Even in self-publishing there is the same sense when reading about other people's successes, the sudden boom in sales and publishers knocking on their door. I wanted to curl up and cry and never look at my writing again.

Anyone else ever feel like this? (Don't worry if you don't answer, Adele has assured me I'm not alone).

This has plagued me on and off for all the time I've been writing. But finally, last night, I found a very effective cure.

In my last post I linked to a YouTube video on The Willpower Instinct (still highly recommend it if you haven't watched it yet. Is 50 minutes, but worth it). One of the exercises Kelly McGonigal recommends for increasing will power is to connect with your future self. Researchers found that students who were given the opportunity to 'talk' with their future selves, asking questions about how life turns out and realising that their future self will experience everything as they do, then showed greater ability to delay gratification in important areas such as setting up savings accounts, etc.

So I tried it. Last night I wrote a letter from my 41 year old self to me now. Ten years in the future, what did I want to say to the person I am now. It was an amazing message of hope and gratitude. In ten years my dreams of being a best selling author had come about. It might have taken longer than I thought it would, but the effort I put in when I was 31-32 now pays my kids' school fees and means I can take wonderful holidays with my family. Yes, it took a while to get a traditional publishing contract, but by building my collection of quality self-published work I had increased the value of that contract because of all the back sales. Taking that bit of extra time in editing meant that I was still proud of all the work I had produced. And the hours I spent at the computer rather than watching T.V. meant that I could now spend time playing with my children.

To your future self, after the event, it doesn't seem to matter if it happened after 1 year or after 5. The important thing is that you kept trying until it did happen.

So I highly recommend you try this next time you get frustrated. And yes, maybe I will need to keep writing myself letters of encouragement. I might need to be my own cheer squad for many years to come. But eventually I will be there, because I'm not going to let myself give up.

And having said all that, there are also sweet points along the way. I've received two reviews from individuals who won a copy of After The Winter, both 4 stars on Goodreads (which anyone who knows Goodreads will realise how great that is.) How sweet are these?

Rachael said: "If you’re a fan of Downton Abbey, then you’ll love this book" (what more could an author ask for?)

And Kathryn said: "Lucinda is a lovely character who makes you just want the best for her. I wanted to give her a hug at different points and tell her that it would all be ok." Which is exactly how I felt for Lucinda, so I'm glad that other people feel this way too!

For the full reviews, see After The Winter on Goodreads. 

Goals:
I'm now working on episode 6 of Virtually Ideal. Last week I had a few reasonable days of 3,500 words, and one or two great days of just over 5,000. Then I had a day or two like yesterday when I couldn't write anything fresh.

However, I did not waste that time. I spent two hours yesterday, and one hour the other day I couldn't write editing Bootcamp. I'm focusing on the manuscript section by section at the moment and going over each chunk to make sure it's logical, with the clearest possible examples, good connectors and says everything that I want it to. I can see that it still needs quite a lot of editing work, but every time I read it I'm impressed with the good advice I've given (some of which I then put into practice myself!).  

This week I want to finish episode 6 and start episode 7. Need to keep pushing ahead as I want to finish the series this month so I can do my own Nanowrimo in July to write a brand new contemporary romance: Five Days In Vienna (based on a true story... mine. But more about that later). But if I get too burnt out to write, then I'll spend more time editing Bootcamp.

My brother is sending me a copy of Story by Robert McKee, which is particularly for screenplays but my brother was so impressed with the practical information that he said I needed to read it. I'm really looking forward to it. 

I'm also ahead in my reading challenge, which is great. At the moment I'm working my way through The Aeneid, as I've never read the whole thing, though I had to translate Book IV for my Latin test in year 12, so have always felt a connection to the work. The translation I have is not the most fluid, so it takes quite a bit of mental effort to read, but is refreshingly vivid and varied in its language. 

Anyone else have a good cure for frustration?