While I like the premise of the story, I feel that it jumps into situations that the reader may not understand the how and/or why of. I also feel the there is a little too much cuteness and funny lines, and after a bit it begins to bring the story down. If you were to resubmit this to another publisher, I would suggest paring it down to a shorter story, and change the scenes to add some intro so the reader understands what's going on, and to address the other items I listed.
This rejection came on a story and it just made me feel so deflated. So the story was forgotten for a year and then pulled back out.
Two offers were made for it and it's coming out in December.
Please send your rejection stories to LoriGreenWriter@comcast.net
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Oath of Fealty by Elizabeth Moon
I want to state right up front that I'm an Elizabeth Moon fangrrl (is that how they spell it? Trying to be cool here.)
She is not a Romance writer. She writes straight up SF and pure Fantasy, some with romantic elements, some without. And writes it rather well, I might add.
Twenty years ago - twenty years! - she wrote a trilogy that was incorporated into the book The Deed of Paksenarrion, a fantasy which she admits was based on a Dungeon and Dragon type game she had observed. She felt the characterizations were wrong and so she set out to do it right. We have elves and dwarves and gnomes and high magic; Paladins and gods who interact with humanity. And always, the battle between Good and Evil.
The last book in that trilogy ended with Paksenarrion finding the true king of Lyonya. Twenty years later in my time, he's about to ascend his throne in Oath of Fealty.
Evil stirs again. Actually, it never stopped.
The events in this book are all linked to the happenings in the previous books, but this book can stand alone. My one gripe with it, is that Ms Moon made sure any new reader would know what had happened in the past. And just in case you didn't catch it the first time, another character repeats it.
I admit I was getting outdone with her, but about 1/3 of the way into the book, everything kicked in and off we went on a wild ride of magic and battles and skull duggery and over and above all, likable people you root hard for, who have the courage of their convictions and the moral strength to resist the temptations thrown against them.
There are four storylines, bound together by Paksenarrion. She is not a major character in this book, but through her the protagonists' lives have changed.
There is the new king of Lyonya as he takes control of his kingdom and prepares for the attack he knows will come on his country.
There are two of his former Captains: Dorrin Verrakai who must reveal her magery to contain and destroy the evil her family has done; and Jandelir Arcolin, into whose hand the king's old cohorts have been given and who worries he is a poor substitute as he leads them South to war.
And finally there is Mikeli, a young prince in Deeds, who becomes king of his own land, with the evil opposition trying to assassinate him in Evil's name.
Moon served in the Marines and her books are known for their realistic military action and tactics, and how a common soldier or an officer thinks. Her sword play is exemplary.
I think what captured me and held me for lo, these many years, are her characters. They have faults, they have fears, they have regrets. They strive and sometimes they fail. But they always keep their integrity.
Some might think the contrast between good and evil is too overt in these books and they'd be right as far as the broad action is concerned. The priests of Liart are cruel and just plain nasty, and don't pretend to be anything else. You meet a priest of Liart and you know you're gonna get hurt. Badly.
But the main characters and the secondary characters have different depths to them, some subtle, some not so subtle.
For a great action packed story and the chance to cheer the good guys on, you can't beat Elizabeth Moon. Oath of Fealty is a worthy addition to her impressive list.
She is not a Romance writer. She writes straight up SF and pure Fantasy, some with romantic elements, some without. And writes it rather well, I might add.
Twenty years ago - twenty years! - she wrote a trilogy that was incorporated into the book The Deed of Paksenarrion, a fantasy which she admits was based on a Dungeon and Dragon type game she had observed. She felt the characterizations were wrong and so she set out to do it right. We have elves and dwarves and gnomes and high magic; Paladins and gods who interact with humanity. And always, the battle between Good and Evil.
The last book in that trilogy ended with Paksenarrion finding the true king of Lyonya. Twenty years later in my time, he's about to ascend his throne in Oath of Fealty.
Evil stirs again. Actually, it never stopped.
The events in this book are all linked to the happenings in the previous books, but this book can stand alone. My one gripe with it, is that Ms Moon made sure any new reader would know what had happened in the past. And just in case you didn't catch it the first time, another character repeats it.
I admit I was getting outdone with her, but about 1/3 of the way into the book, everything kicked in and off we went on a wild ride of magic and battles and skull duggery and over and above all, likable people you root hard for, who have the courage of their convictions and the moral strength to resist the temptations thrown against them.
There are four storylines, bound together by Paksenarrion. She is not a major character in this book, but through her the protagonists' lives have changed.
There is the new king of Lyonya as he takes control of his kingdom and prepares for the attack he knows will come on his country.
There are two of his former Captains: Dorrin Verrakai who must reveal her magery to contain and destroy the evil her family has done; and Jandelir Arcolin, into whose hand the king's old cohorts have been given and who worries he is a poor substitute as he leads them South to war.
And finally there is Mikeli, a young prince in Deeds, who becomes king of his own land, with the evil opposition trying to assassinate him in Evil's name.
Moon served in the Marines and her books are known for their realistic military action and tactics, and how a common soldier or an officer thinks. Her sword play is exemplary.
I think what captured me and held me for lo, these many years, are her characters. They have faults, they have fears, they have regrets. They strive and sometimes they fail. But they always keep their integrity.
Some might think the contrast between good and evil is too overt in these books and they'd be right as far as the broad action is concerned. The priests of Liart are cruel and just plain nasty, and don't pretend to be anything else. You meet a priest of Liart and you know you're gonna get hurt. Badly.
But the main characters and the secondary characters have different depths to them, some subtle, some not so subtle.
For a great action packed story and the chance to cheer the good guys on, you can't beat Elizabeth Moon. Oath of Fealty is a worthy addition to her impressive list.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
The Rules of Riting: Epic Fail
I love Loretta Chase. I mean, I want to build a shrine to the woman and light a candle and slaughter a goat for her. I LOVE Loretta Chase.
Loretta Chase is not a good writer though, according to the rules of writing and the fervid followers of such. Would you believe that Ms. Chase on occasion, tells and doesn't show? She starts sentences with But. (In fact, in one paragraph she did it twice and I was ready to call her publisher and ask to speak to the lazy editor who allowed that.)
Oh she can tell a wonderful story, write beautifully, create characters I'm totally invested in and make me laugh out loud in public places as I read her but she's just not a good writer. She doesn't start in the action, she allows the reader to use their imagination to fill in spots and she trusts in her reader's intelligence to believe that she'll follow along and not have to have everything spelled out.
This little rant is coming because of the writing advice that peppers the online writing community. So many writers out there who know the rules and are quick to quote what you may or may not do.
Start with the action. Show, never tell. Don't head-hop. Keep description to a minimum.
I doon't understand where these rules come from. A creative writing class I was in with Robert Ray many years ago, Mr. Ray gave rules of riting, one that included no stories allowed with only two characters in a romantic moment. I left the class never to return. His rule was ridiculous (the author in question was writing a short story about an anniversary dinner) and I knew that such arbitrary rules would never work for me.
I worry about these arbitrary rules and how they stifle writers. I happen to know a certain writer who loves description and a little head hopping and when she writes it flows. Then she says it's all wrong because rules are broken and the writer dips her head in shame and dismay.
I don't believe in rules unless you plan on breaking them.
Did I mention that I love Loretta Chase? Oh I do. She's such a rule breaker. And she does it so damned well.
(By the way, reading Not Quite A Lady right now and am LOVING it. Highly recommended.)
Loretta Chase is not a good writer though, according to the rules of writing and the fervid followers of such. Would you believe that Ms. Chase on occasion, tells and doesn't show? She starts sentences with But. (In fact, in one paragraph she did it twice and I was ready to call her publisher and ask to speak to the lazy editor who allowed that.)
Oh she can tell a wonderful story, write beautifully, create characters I'm totally invested in and make me laugh out loud in public places as I read her but she's just not a good writer. She doesn't start in the action, she allows the reader to use their imagination to fill in spots and she trusts in her reader's intelligence to believe that she'll follow along and not have to have everything spelled out.
This little rant is coming because of the writing advice that peppers the online writing community. So many writers out there who know the rules and are quick to quote what you may or may not do.
Start with the action. Show, never tell. Don't head-hop. Keep description to a minimum.
I doon't understand where these rules come from. A creative writing class I was in with Robert Ray many years ago, Mr. Ray gave rules of riting, one that included no stories allowed with only two characters in a romantic moment. I left the class never to return. His rule was ridiculous (the author in question was writing a short story about an anniversary dinner) and I knew that such arbitrary rules would never work for me.
I worry about these arbitrary rules and how they stifle writers. I happen to know a certain writer who loves description and a little head hopping and when she writes it flows. Then she says it's all wrong because rules are broken and the writer dips her head in shame and dismay.
I don't believe in rules unless you plan on breaking them.
Did I mention that I love Loretta Chase? Oh I do. She's such a rule breaker. And she does it so damned well.
(By the way, reading Not Quite A Lady right now and am LOVING it. Highly recommended.)
Monday, June 7, 2010
Rejection Monday: Part Two
From The Old Farts Files, our own rejection. Not too disheartening but not making us dance in joy either.
I really like your writing style and appreciate your humor. However, I am not sure how marketable this style of book is. I can easy understand incorporating letters as a means of communication and a way to further plot within a story. Many have done it, and done so successfully. Having a whole book based on letters is a bit difficult for a reader to follow and develop a firm hold on characters, setting, etc.
I really like your writing style and appreciate your humor. However, I am not sure how marketable this style of book is. I can easy understand incorporating letters as a means of communication and a way to further plot within a story. Many have done it, and done so successfully. Having a whole book based on letters is a bit difficult for a reader to follow and develop a firm hold on characters, setting, etc.
Rejection Monday
Every Monday Dear Author (www.dearauthor.com) does a First Sale column where an author shares her First Sale story.
It's the sort of thing that gives one hope. That warms the heart and makes the bluebirds sing.
This Monday morning a bird crapped all over my windshield and another rejection appeared in my in-box.
So The Old Farts will be presenting their Rejection Monday column.
Send us (LoriGreenWriter@comcast.net) your rejection story and you can find your tale snickered at, sympathized with or simply tut-tutted over.
Because let's face it, most writer's have a hell of a lot more rejection tales to tell than first sales.
It's the sort of thing that gives one hope. That warms the heart and makes the bluebirds sing.
This Monday morning a bird crapped all over my windshield and another rejection appeared in my in-box.
So The Old Farts will be presenting their Rejection Monday column.
Send us (LoriGreenWriter@comcast.net) your rejection story and you can find your tale snickered at, sympathized with or simply tut-tutted over.
Because let's face it, most writer's have a hell of a lot more rejection tales to tell than first sales.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Film Review: Grace is Gone by Lea
I love John Cusack. I’ve been a huge fan since seeing “Class” and of course his bit parts in “16 Candles”, “Stand by me” and other classics like “Better off dead” and “Hot pursuit”. Ok, so the second two aren’t exactly cult favourites but I liked ‘em. I may not have seen everything he’s done but he is someone I could watch and not feel like I’ve wasted my time or money.
A couple of days ago I watched him in another ‘road’ movie. Unlike his first one though – “The Sure Thing” – this wasn’t a quirky comedy/romance movie. “Grace is Gone”, although not a ‘romance’ is a movie about love; at least I believe so.
In the Sure Thing, John’s character “Gib” has to endure the trip with anal-retentive know-it-all Alison (Daphne Zuniga). He’s on his way to his mate Goose’s… umm, Lance’s (sorry, Anthony Edwards will always be Goose for me :-) ) place on the West Coast, so he can hook up with a ‘sure thing’. Of course the trip doesn’t go smoothly and you just know at the end they are going to hook up.
In Grace is Gone, John plays the father of two young girls who’s wife is killed in Iraq. He gets the news and has a meltdown of sorts. When the girls get home from school, rather than tell them about their mother he takes them on a drive that turns in to a 3-4 day road trip. Along the way a couple of events lead the elder daughter to believe something is wrong but she doesn’t ask her father and he doesn’t tell. The youngest daughter is just happy to be on the trip, heading for a fun park. It’s only as they are returning home that he tells them.
I really loved John’s portrayal in this movie. He was so convincing at some parts I just wanted to shake him and tell him to snap out of it whilst in others I just wanted to hug him and tell him it would be ok. It was clear that although he had no plans as to what he was doing, he was determined to give the girls a last piece of happiness before their world was torn apart with the news of their mother’s death.
Was he right to shelter them from the news for as long as he did and in the way he did? Who’s to say? The movie was fictional but of course things like that happen every day, all over the world. People are constantly faced with the ‘will I/won’t I/should I’ dilemma. Is the situation likely to be any easier if it’s dependant on how long or how invested you are in the other person? Would knowing someone a year as opposed to 30 years make delivering devastating news not as traumatic? It all comes down to individuals and the situation I suppose. You might know someone your whole life and not be as connected to them as you are to someone who’s just entered your life.
Anyway, I loved this movie, despite the sadness of the subject matter. Underneath the grief, humour, inner turmoil and meanness there was love. It wasn’t always shown and rarely spoken but I could feel it just from the way the characters interacted or did things. Was this movie a romance? Definitely not but it had just as much love, if not more than your normal rom-com, and that’s good enough for me. Worthy of another look for sure.
A couple of days ago I watched him in another ‘road’ movie. Unlike his first one though – “The Sure Thing” – this wasn’t a quirky comedy/romance movie. “Grace is Gone”, although not a ‘romance’ is a movie about love; at least I believe so.
In the Sure Thing, John’s character “Gib” has to endure the trip with anal-retentive know-it-all Alison (Daphne Zuniga). He’s on his way to his mate Goose’s… umm, Lance’s (sorry, Anthony Edwards will always be Goose for me :-) ) place on the West Coast, so he can hook up with a ‘sure thing’. Of course the trip doesn’t go smoothly and you just know at the end they are going to hook up.
In Grace is Gone, John plays the father of two young girls who’s wife is killed in Iraq. He gets the news and has a meltdown of sorts. When the girls get home from school, rather than tell them about their mother he takes them on a drive that turns in to a 3-4 day road trip. Along the way a couple of events lead the elder daughter to believe something is wrong but she doesn’t ask her father and he doesn’t tell. The youngest daughter is just happy to be on the trip, heading for a fun park. It’s only as they are returning home that he tells them.
I really loved John’s portrayal in this movie. He was so convincing at some parts I just wanted to shake him and tell him to snap out of it whilst in others I just wanted to hug him and tell him it would be ok. It was clear that although he had no plans as to what he was doing, he was determined to give the girls a last piece of happiness before their world was torn apart with the news of their mother’s death.
Was he right to shelter them from the news for as long as he did and in the way he did? Who’s to say? The movie was fictional but of course things like that happen every day, all over the world. People are constantly faced with the ‘will I/won’t I/should I’ dilemma. Is the situation likely to be any easier if it’s dependant on how long or how invested you are in the other person? Would knowing someone a year as opposed to 30 years make delivering devastating news not as traumatic? It all comes down to individuals and the situation I suppose. You might know someone your whole life and not be as connected to them as you are to someone who’s just entered your life.
Anyway, I loved this movie, despite the sadness of the subject matter. Underneath the grief, humour, inner turmoil and meanness there was love. It wasn’t always shown and rarely spoken but I could feel it just from the way the characters interacted or did things. Was this movie a romance? Definitely not but it had just as much love, if not more than your normal rom-com, and that’s good enough for me. Worthy of another look for sure.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Snark Alert!
So there's this author who I follow on Twitter and sometimes she tweets book excerpts when she finishes a story and well, she just isn't a very good writer.
I always find myself wanting to point out her um, flaws, when she tweets her work like that. Anybody else experience this?
I always find myself wanting to point out her um, flaws, when she tweets her work like that. Anybody else experience this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)