Books

  • Revisiting a rejected novel

    Revisiting a rejected novel

    In an earlier blog post, I brought up the topic of whether it’s worth dusting off an old rejected novel. After all, the reasons for rejection might relate more to submitting against dominant publishing trends rather than writing a bad book. In this post, I explore revisiting a rejected novel. Because often the advice is to leave them. But this is not always the best advice. It really depends on a number of things.

    Some first novels are also overly ambitious and beyond the writer’s abilities at the time. But after more experience, it’s possible to revisit a rejected novel, polish it up, and bring it to publication.

    Case study: Hilary Mantel

    The case study I’m going to use is that of the late Hilary Mantel, the author of Wolf Hall. The first novel she ever wrote was the French Revolution novel, A Place of Greater Safety. She was twenty two when she started writing it and she was interested in writing from the perspective of the leading revolutionaries. Because she was moving abroad to Botswana, she had to do a lot of her research at the start, taking advantage of still being in England.

    In an interview with the Paris Review she said that she only became a novelist because she thought she’d missed her chance to become a historian.

    How fitting then that she started with historical fiction.

    A Place of Greater Safety

    She wanted to tell the story of the revolution from the viewpoint of the idealists who drove it, not the aristocracy they targeted. She felt the story she wanted to read wasn’t there, so she wrote it. She started off intending it to have a documentary element to the writing (which in some ways is still present in some places), and when she could she quoted directly from history. But she ran out of known facts at times, leading her to have to make things up, but never in a way that went against historical truth.

    It was simply a case of not enough being known about some revolutionaries or some events. She never changed the truth to ramp up the drama:

    I aim to make the fiction flexible so that it bends itself around the facts as we have them. Otherwise I don’t see the point. Nobody seems to understand that. Nobody seems to share my approach to historical fiction.

    Hilary Mantel in the Paris Review

    At the time of the original writing, she did not focus on the women around these men. She lived part-time as an eighteenth century man in 1790s France and part-time as a woman in the real world of Botswana.

    When she finished her novel, she grieved for the characters. Like her, they’d been young.

    Facing rejection

    But now that she’d finished the French Revolution novel, she had to try and get a publisher or agent. Unfortunately, there was no interest. The market had turned against historical novels, and at least one person rejected outright on the basis they didn’t take historical romance. Yet that wasn’t the book’s genre.

    Mantel also had health issues and spent time in hospital during this period. She came to realise then that the novel would not be published for now, though she had not lost faith in it.

    And so Mantel turned to contemporary fiction. It was her ‘cunning plan’ to get a publisher and a foot in the door. After she had some success there, she was contacted by Clare Boylan who was writing an article on unpublished first novels. Did Mantel have one? The answer of course was yes. But of all the authors Boylan contacted, Mantel was the only one who wanted to see her first novel published. It had sat on a shelf for many years.

    Finally submitting the novel

    I thought, What if it’s no good? Because if it is no good, then that’s my twenties written off. And it also means that I commenced my career with a gigantic mistake. But inside me there was still a belief that it would be published one day.

    Hilary Mantel in the Paris Review

    The day Mantel took her manuscript to her agent, she met another writer for lunch first, and they warned her not to submit it. But she ignored this advice and did it anyway.

    Many years had passed since she’d written the novel. Mantel was a lot older, and more academic work had been done on the French Revolution, including feminist historians researching the women involved.

    With her novel finally accepted, Mantel plunged into a furious summer of reworking. This included building up her female characters more. But the size of the book meant that she was not able to polish everything to her satisfaction. She’d written the novel in present tense and someone at the publishing house objected to this. Yet the novel still has present tense at times.

    The cover of Hilary Mantel's novel A Place of Greater Safety.
    A Place of Greater Safety

    Indeed, the novel’s style is somewhat erratic at times – it even resorts to simple dialogue scenes written like a script in parts. The novel was published without Mantel sorting out all the issues. The summer of rewriting took its toll on her. But the book finally emerged, going on to win the Sunday Express Book of the Year Award.

    Written in her twenties, in the 1970s, it was finally published in 1992. She had not started her career with a gigantic mistake. She had not wasted her twenties. She fully captured the youthful idealism of the revolutionaries at a time in her life when she could identify with them. Then once she’d established her name enough, she was able to get the novel accepted.

    Her cunning plan worked out.

    Later she would realise, when writing about Thomas Cromwell, that she couldn’t have written A Place of Greater Safety in middle age. She was more cynical by then. But she would go on to make her name as a writer of historical fiction with the Thomas Cromwell novels.

    References

    Interview with Hilary Mantel in the Paris Review (open to read).

    The Dead are Real: Hilary Mantel’s Imagination by Larissa MacFarquhar (paywalled, but possibly available as your one free read of the month).

    Related blog posts

    Feel free to check out my long review on A Place of Greater Safety, and my post about dusting off an old rejected novel. If you have a long-abandoned manuscript you’re thinking of reworking, you can check out my manuscript critique service. While there are different tiers, depending on the depth of the feedback, the lowest tier or a special package can be arranged for a shorter assessment of your draft. Feel free to contact me at karen@indiecateditorial.com to discuss your options.

    It should be recognised though that sometimes authors cannot bear to go back to an earlier rejected book. Sometimes the enthusiasm is no longer there. But that doesn’t mean you didn’t learn from the writing.

    Sign up for emails on writing and editing

    Once a week I send out emails on writing, editing, and writing competition news. These emails usually go out on a Monday or Tuesday. If you want to receive these posts and newsletters, you can sign up below.

  • A Short Post on Book Blurbs

    A short post on book blurbs

    Cash-strapped indie authors often write their own book blurbs without understanding the point of back cover copy, or its place within the sales conversion sequence. Some people also confuse a synopsis with a blurb. So in this post I wanted to briefly outline the goal of a book blurb.

    My Training Background

    To be clear, I studied blurb writing at the UK’s Publishing Training Centre where I earned a distinction for publishing-related copywriting. I also studied conversion copywriting at the Copy Posse Launch Pad and Copy Hackers. So I’m taking what I’ve learned from both the original blurb training and conversion copywriting.

    Blurbs within a conversion sequence

    Your blurb is part of a sales conversion sequence that starts with great cover art and a great book title.

    You can even have a great tag line. Think ‘In space no one can hear you scream‘ for Alien. If the cover/title/tag line catches the potential book buyer’s eye, they will pick up the book and turn it over to browse the back.

    Important: they are not committed to buying your book and should not be overwhelmed with information at this point. You want to use your back copy to hook their attention further so that they turn the book over and start browsing the first page.

    Now your opening lines and page(s) are the next part of your conversion sequence. So they have to be good too. Don’t be sloppy with your opening (or any other part of the book). Ideally, the sales conversion sequence should go bang, bang, bang:

    Cover art/title >>>> blurb >>>> opening lines and page(s)/Kindle Sample >>>> purchase!

    Of course, most of the time the browser won’t buy, but this is still their first point of contact with your book and if it’s memorable they will remember it.

    Further exposure to your book on later occasions can push them into purchase. This is because they start as a cold prospect who knows nothing about you or your book, but, with multiple encounters with your book cover/title/blurb, they can gradually warm up into becoming more informed prospects. They’re now ‘warmer’ and closer to purchasing.

    But this will be more difficult to achieve if you overwhelm them with information about your plot and characters. Focus on main character(s) and plot only. Don’t give away too much. You’re aiming for a hook.

    You can include glowing review quotes on the cover, or mention any relevant awards you’ve won. But don’t overdo it on the back cover.

    In summary

    As mentioned, I studied blurb writing at the UK’s Publishing Training Centre. It was enormously frustrating at first to have to write such short back cover copy. However, when you remember that the blurb is only part of the sales sequence, that helps a lot.

    Some writers who write their own blurbs throw everything at it, drowning readers in character names and plots and subplots. It’s too much. Never overwhelm a potential reader. There are too many other books for them to choose instead. A tangled blurb with confusing plots and characters could suggest the novel itself is just as confusing to read. And that’s the last impression you want to give!

    If you’re looking for a fresh pair of eyes on your book blurb or fiction manuscript, I have openings. I offer manuscript critiques, developmental edits, and shorter critiques for those on a budget. Check my services tab or email me at karen@indiecateditorial.com to discuss your project.

    Related posts from my archive:

    Sign up for emails on writing and editing

    I post on editing and writing once a week on Substack. You can sign up for these emails below. Some of these emails are newsletters or announcements about writing competition news.

  • Exploring Brokeback Mountain

    Exploring Brokeback Mountain

    Exploring Brokeback Mountain

    Brokeback Mountain was originally published in the New Yorker in a slightly shorter form on October 13th 1997. It would go on to win the National Magazine Award in 1998 and 3rd place in the O. Henry Prize. The longer version of the story appeared in the short story collection, Close Range: Wyoming Stories.

    As a shorter piece of fiction, it was perfect for screen adaptation. Author and screenwriter Larry McMurtry said in an essay that: “I was the more stunned when I read ‘Brokeback Mountain’ because I realized it was a story that had been sitting there all my life, fifty-five years of which have been lived in the American West.” He described the writing as “Spare, wire-fence prose that is congruent with the landscape itself, and with the struggling, bruised speech still to be heard today across the north plains.“

    Of course the story went on to become a famous film, though it took years. A story about ‘gay cowboys’ was not exactly Hollywood fare.

    Author background

    Annie Proulx was born in 1935 and wrote her first story at the age of 10 while sick with chicken pox. She has a B.A. and an M.A. in history.

    In her essay, Getting Movied, she wrote: As a student of history and a writer of fiction my interest has focused on social and economic change in rural communities – Vermont, Newfoundland, Texas, Wyoming. I am something of a geographical determinist, believing that regional landscapes, climate and topography dictate local cultural traditions and kinds of work, and thereby the events on which my stories are built. Landscape is central to this rural fiction.

    Birth of a story

    Great story ideas often have simple beginnings. Brokeback Mountain was born when Proulx noticed a middle-aged man in a Wyoming bar who appeared to be watching the younger men playing pool. She noted something in his expression, a bitter longing, that made her think he might be ‘country gay’. This in turn led to her wondering what it might be like for a man like this in rural Wyoming.

    A few weeks later, the author listened to a homophobic bar-cafe owner ranting on about two ‘homos’ who had come in the night before for dinner. If the regulars had been in that night, ‘it would have gone badly for them’.

    Brokeback Mountain was built on the back of these experiences, the plot following two young country boys in a homophobic environment who also suffered from internalised homophobia themselves.

    She chose the sixties as the time period which would give both characters the right background and experience. The characters were also not cowboys as such, though they longed for the cowboy life. Instead, they herded sheep (an animal looked down on by real cowboys), while neither later went on to be top hands. Even Jack’s rodeo riding never landed him success. Screenwriter McMurtry saw Jack and Ennis in the long American tradition of doomed young men, also seen in the likes of The Great Gatsby and The Sun Also Rises.

    Proulx would write the story over a period of roughly six months, going through more than sixty drafts. She did most of the ‘writing’ when she was driving. One curve in the road became the place where Ennis’s parents died in the story. The scene where Jack and Ennis meet up and kiss after four years came to her when she was driving past a cement plant of all places. To perfectly capture the scene where Ennis holds Jack and rocks him back and forth, she played a piece of music over and over. It was a very difficult scene to write and she wanted to nail it.

    The story had several working titles before she settled on the final one: “The Pleasures of Whiskey Mountain,” “Bulldust Mountain,” “Swill-Swallow Mountain,” and “Drinkard Mountain”. They don’t seem quite right now. Brokeback Mountain was the right choice.

    Location

    Time and place are central to Brokeback Mountain. From the characters’ dialect (including Jack’s switch to some Texan pronunciations later), to their impoverished backgrounds, their direct interaction with nature and the mountain, and the social attitudes of their time.

    In her essay Movied, Proulx talks about the importance of location. The mountain itself would force the two men together. It would also represent the happiest time of their lives. Their infrequent meetings in the following two decades would mostly take place in the wilderness. Away from the prying eyes of townsfolk, they could be themselves.

    Weather is also important – the wind blows through the opening section of the story, where an older Ennis wakes up in his trailer, about to move on to a new location, but warmed by the dream he just had of Jack.

    Prose Style

    Brokeback Mountain is written in a compact and spare style where a single sentence can travel a long distance.

    They were raised on small, poor ranches in opposite corners of the state, Jack Twist in Lightning Flat up on the Montana border, Ennis del Mar from around Sage, near the Utah line, both high school dropout country boys with no prospects, brought up to hard work and privation, both rough-mannered, rough-spoken, inured to the stoic life.

    This is just one example of Proulx’s style, squeezing a lot of information into a single long sentence of several lines.

    The story’s POV is also omniscient, though mostly seen from Ennis’s perspective. We get comments about the characters that could be the author or another character’s thoughts – such as when Joe Aguirre hires the two and after giving them their instructions, we’re told after his speech: Pair of deuces going nowhere.

    Usually omniscient is best avoided, but it doesn’t seem to interfere with the narrative in this case.

    Aftermath

    The film was immensely popular and Proulx particularly felt Heath Ledger was the perfect Ennis. But the film would also trigger a huge amount of fan fiction, some of it quite explicit. Proulx would later claim she regretted writing the story owing to the manuscripts she received. Fans, usually men, would rewrite the ending, offering a happier outcome or even a new relationship for Ennis. This frustrated the author who felt the fans were missing the point of the story. It was not about Jack and Ennis but about destructive rural homophobia. Given the subject matter and period, a happy ending would be out of place. It would also miss the entire point of the closing lines of the story:

    There was some open space between what he knew and what he tried to believe, but nothing could be done about it, and if you can’t fix it you’ve got to stand it.

    Conclusion

    Simple ideas can lead to powerful stories. Brokeback Mountain is a perfect example. I recommend the book below which includes essays from Annie Proulx herself as well as the two screenwriters. The full story and the screenplay are also included.

    Brokeback Mountain: Story to Screenplay.

    If you want to check out more of my posts of authors and writing, you can click this link:

    Masterlist of IndieCat Blog Posts.

    Sign up for emails on writing and editing!

    I post on my editing Substack once a week, sometimes less. If you sign up you will receive blog posts on writing and editing straight to your email inbox, plus occasional news of writing competitions.

  • Character credibility in Jurassic Park

    Character credibility in Jurassic Park

    Michael Crichton’s 1991 blockbuster novel Jurassic Park is a great adventure story as well as a warning against corporate greed and the corruption of science.

    My first contact with the novel came through the fantastic Audible edition. More recently, I read the hard copy. There are differences between the two – the physical book includes graphs and tables.

    While I like the book a lot, there are character credibility problems I’ve seen in a number of my client manuscripts. I’ve written about the issue in a previous blog post which I’ll link to at the end. However, in the case of Jurassic Park, it seemed a particular and earlier section of the book that was impacted more than the rest.

    Alan Grant – the palaeontologist

    When we meet Grant, one of the main characters, he’s excavating an infant velociraptor. The skeleton is millions of years old.

    Pound for pound, a velociraptor was the most rapacious dinosaur that ever lived. Although relativity small – about two hundred pounds, the size of a leopard – velociraptors were quick, intelligent, and vicious, able to attack with sharp jaws, powerful clawed forearms, and the devastating single claw on the floor.

    Not all the ‘facts’ about dinosaurs in the book are correct and science always moves on. However, these animals will be the most dangerous predators in the book, even worse than the Tyrannosaurus rex.

    Shortly after this, Grant gets a visit from the Environmental Protection Agency rep who wants to know about John Hammond and his mysterious island off the coast of Costa Rica. Grant doesn’t know what Hammond is up to, even though he wrote a paper for him on juvenile dinosaur behaviour and took calls from a colleague of Hammond’s on what dinosaurs eat.

    Shortly after this, he receives an X-ray of an animal that attacked a little girl in Costa Rica. Grant identifies it as a small dinosaur. He and his colleague Ellie are shocked at this development.

    Next he gets a phone call from Hammond, asking him to come to his mysterious island.

    Lured by money, Grant and his palaeobotanist colleague Ellie agree. They receive a map showing military-level fortifications there, including high electrified fences and wide moats. It’s very far from anything expected in a resort.

    On the flight to Costa Rica, Grant and Ellie are still not asking what’s going on, even as Ian Malcolm, the mathematician, says the island is doomed to fail and it’s an accident waiting to happen.

    This ought to trigger a reaction from Grant. It doesn’t. He lacks curiosity and seems strangely passive for an expert on a mysterious mission to an island. He also doesn’t reflect on the fact a small dinosaur, previously thought extinct, has turned up on Costa Rica. He and Ellie should still be obsessing over this development.

    Landing on Isla Nublar

    When they land on the island, they see their first brontosaurus. There’s a herd of them. Naturally, Grant and Ellie are shocked, but also excited. However, neither asks if there are other dinosaurs. There is a sign that reads ‘Welcome to Jurassic Park’ and still no one asks if there are other prehistoric animals.

    This lack of curiosity from specialists doesn’t seem credible. Even an ordinary member of the public would immediately wonder what else is roaming the island.

    Ellie is more interested in prehistoric plants that could prove dangerous to humans.

    When Grant is shown to his room, he sees a TV with a card listing channels. None of the live feeds work. But with names like Triceratops Territory, Sauropod Swamp, Carnivore Country and Velociraptor Valley, Grant ought to react immediately. Instead, he finds the names irritatingly cute. Not exactly a credible reaction from a man who has studied dinosaurs all his life, never expecting to meet any.

    He’s been working on a velociraptor dig. The chance to see them in the park should blow his socks off. But knowing how dangerous they are likely to be, he should also show concern.

    He should be wondering exactly what species Hammond has brought back to life. Especially given the heavy fortifications shown on the park plans.

    The only thing he does is look at the skylight and the windows, noticing that they’re fortified in ways that weren’t included in the plans he and Ellie saw. When Ellie appears, she agrees that these bars on the windows must be a new addition.

    Think about it – they’ve worked on dinosaur digs, yet neither of them are reacting to the listed species above the television or drawing any connections between them and the high security. They don’t speculate. They don’t join the dots. They’re passive characters, except when there’s an opportunity to show their expert subject.

    The author might sneak some dinosaur names to the reader, but while it’s possible to sneak information past a viewpoint character at times, this wouldn’t be a situation where that would work. Grant knows too much about the subject. His heart should have leapt at the channel list. He should have been full of questions.

    A growing sense of trepidation should have crept up on him too – as he linked the live cam channel list to the fortified visitor quarters.

    Likewise, when they go to the visitor centre, where an animatronic T-rex is on display, Grant, Ellie and Ian Malcolm don’t ask if there are any real T-rexes in the park.

    Most ordinary people would ask this, possibly partly in excitement, but also fear, given the reputation of the species.

    The visitors are told they’re there to check the safety of the park which opens next year. You would think at this point someone would step up and ask about any other species in the park, especially more dangerous predators. But no one does.

    Crichton controls the narrative to such a degree that he essentially favours pushing the plot on in a way that sacrifices character credibility at this point.

    A missed opportunity with Tim

    When Hammond’s grandchildren turn up, they know nothing about the dinosaurs. The boy, Tim, is a dinosaur nut and recognises Grant. They talk about a museum exhibit of a T-rex with the wrong number of vertebrae. Grant says the museum probably won’t do anything about it now because of what’s happening on the island. Tim doesn’t know what he means and Grant says he’ll explain as they walk.

    The first time I heard this part of the novel, on the Audible version, I expected to see Tim’s reaction. He’s a dinosaur nut. His grandfather is responsible for Jurassic Park. Tim and his sister are now on an island with dinosaurs. This ought to spin his world upside down. In an instant, his perception of the world around him should have changed. There should also be shock, disbelief, excitement, fear, and so on.

    Instead, we get no reaction at all. The novel skips over it and the next we see of Tim is when they’re exploring the labs. He’s excited by the biohazard signs, but he’s not thinking about dinosaurs. He has already accepted there are dinosaurs here. Soon, he’s bored with the science talk and wants to see the dinosaurs.

    But how many people would adjust to this new reality so quickly? Tim’s reactions don’t match someone who has ‘dinosaurs on the brain’. He would also likely wonder what species were in the park. He’d surely wonder if a famous species like T-rex was around.

    The lab and control room

    When Grant and the others reach the lab and hatchery, specific species are mentioned but no one reacts. Stegosaurus and Triceratops first, but then Wu mentions that the T-rex, though female, tends to be referred to as a male. Neither Grant nor anyone else reacts to the mention of the legendary carnivore.

    To say this is odd or even incredible is an understatement. The very presence of an animal of this type should not only result in excitement and anticipation, even disbelief that they are finally going to see one for real, but also concern for the park. This is a resort. There will be visitors. No one is reacting appropriately.

    Before they all reach the control room, someone (Malcolm) finally asks how many species there are in the park.

    Again, it seems incredible that Grant never asked this, or even Tim. No one asks for a list.

    Later in the control room, a list shows up in the computer, complete with the number of expected animals in each category, the number found by the motion sensors, and a version number for each animal – for example, 4.1. Instead of reacting to the list of extinct animals brought back to life and assessing what this means, Grant only wants to know about the batch numbers.

    There are also issues relating to the first face-to-face meeting with the adult velociraptors. However, the point has been made. The characters are not acting like real people with a background in palaeontology.

    Likely obstacles to credible character reactions

    There are a number of reasons why the characters often don’t react in a credible way to a situation. Part of it is down to where Crichton wants to direct reader attention and when he wants to delay something to be revealed later.

    The problem though is that in the real world such characters would be falling over themselves to ask questions. There would be overwhelming curiosity, a sense of urgency to know the truth. They would lack patience and would be more assertive in asking questions. This in turn would raise stakes and tension.

    Info dumping is another issue which gets in the way of credible character reactions. Crichton uses his characters to impart a lot of information to other characters and the reader. These dialogue sections allow characters to sometimes give extensive information without much interruption. In the real world, impatience and interruption and people talking over one another would be more realistic.

    The information dumping and the questions that lead to these dumps are also a distraction technique. If Malcolm, the mathematician, asks a question about something, it means the dinosaur revelations are delayed a bit further. On re-reading, this seemed like a deliberate choice on the author’s part. He used ‘look squirrel’ conversation topics to delay revelation and information.

    Meanwhile, the viewpoint characters can often become little more than a detached camera at times. Deeper perspective might have forced more credible reactions.

    There are also times when some of the characters retreat so much into the background that it’s easy to forget they’re there. If Malcolm and someone else are talking, it prevents Grant from asking what ought to be the more realistic questions about a dinosaur park.

    Conclusion

    In spite of all that, Jurassic Park is still a very entertaining novel. I only watched the film after my first contact with the book, so I preferred the book to the Spielberg film, partly because the film went into less detail. I still prefer the book in spite of any flaws it has. There are many great and memorable scenes and flashes of humour.

    I’ve written before on character credibility issues and how one event/experience should really act as a domino that hits the next. A character should be impacted by previous experience or knowledge. You can read the relevant post at the link below:

    Character credibility and the domino effect.

    Looking for feedback on your characters?

    If you’re looking for feedback on your manuscript – characters, plot, structure, etc – feel free to contact me at karen@indiecateditorial.com. You can also check out my services pages. Only the Opening Chapters Developmental Edit has a flat rate. Any other prices are a general guide.

    Sign up for IndieCat Emails!

    Once a week, or less, I send out emails from my Substack on writing and editing topics. I also send out news of writing competitions I’ve heard of. You can sign up below if you’re interested.