Editor's Notes #42: Best Books on Writing and Editing Part 2—Your Thoughts

As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more here.

In Editor's Notes #41, I talked about one of my personal goals from 2017 that I'm continuing in 2018: reading one non-fiction book on writing and editing at all times, regardless of whatever else I'm reading for work or pleasure. I listed a few of my favorites and then asked about yours. I also read through a handful of threads in my editing groups to see what they recommended. There are so many wonderful books out there that it's hard to know which ones to prioritize, but I'll make an attempt here to list the ones that seem to get mentioned over and over again, and you can let me know if you've read any of them, or if you'd recommend something completely different.

Here are four great books to start with, as recommended by others in the field. As I began to work on this post, I realized there were TOO many good books to cram into one place, so I'm going to add a third post to this series and will share more with you next time. Too many recommendations at once will all start to blur into one another, I think, and then you may not look into any of them due to being overwhelmed.

The Best Punctuation Book, Period by June Casagrande—In my last post, I told you about how much I liked Casagrande's style. One of the editor admins of a group I'm in said she bought this because "the author was so nice" to her on Twitter. It pays to be kind, people. But I digress. The book covers punctuation for all sorts of styles, from Chicago Manual of Style to Associate Press, MLA (Modern Language Association) and APA (American Psychological Association). Having the conventions of book publishing, science and other academic journals, news media and more presented side by side makes this almost a one-stop shop.

Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life by Anne Lamott—I've seen this recommended multiple times by writers and editors alike. As if she read my mind, author Kim Watt posted a video review of it recently, calling it "encouraging" and filled with "lovely humor." She even reads an excerpt from it about supportive people at "Zen and the Art of Making Mistakes"

The Emotion Thesaurus: A Writer's Guide to Character Expression by Angela Ackerman—I believe S.K. Anthony (Writers After Dark and her own book site) recommended this one to me years ago. This is only one book in Ackerman's series, and it's full of page after page of helpful ways to show emotion in your writing. I do own this one, but since it's not a book that one reads from front to back, I didn't list it in the last post. I follow this author on Instagram, and she is all about helping writers to be their best . . . even the name of her IG account is writers_helping_writers_angela. Her website, One Stop for Writers, has a nice selection of helpful checklists, idea generators, templates, and more. The other books in the Thesaurus series include Emotional Wound, Positive Trait, Urban Setting, Rural Setting, and Negative Trait.

The Marshall Plan for Novel Writing by Evan Marshall—Author Jack Tyler (Beyond the Rails) mentioned this in the comments of my previous post, so I forced asked him to write a little bit about it. Jack says, "Like so many people, I had plenty of ideas for stories, and always wanted to write, but had no idea how to put the elements together. I went through scores of books that gave me such priceless information as "always have an engaging story in mind," and "strong characters need deep backstories." Good advice, but marginally helpful at best.
         "Enter Evan Marshall, a New York superagent, and his Marshall Plan for Novel Writing. In this book, he details the concepts that everyone else seems to assume you know, items like how many viewpoint characters you need, who these characters are, their roles, how many scenes to give each one, when to drop twists and surprises, all those things that are vital if you're going to construct a compelling story.
         "The Marshall Plan isn't for everyone. I have tried and failed to write without a plan. I needed to know how that plan should be constructed, and The Marshall Plan delivers the goods thoroughly and understandably. I bought that book new in 1998, and became an effective writer shortly thereafter. I've always been able to construct the pieces, but thanks to Mr. Marshall's insights, I now know how to use them to build the finished product."

***

There you have it. A handful of books to look into until next time. If you own or have read any of these, I'd love to hear your thoughts on whether they've been helpful to your writing journey or not. If you have something you like better, let's hear about it! I have at least six more books others have been telling me about, and I'll be posting the ones that have been recommended the most often.

Until next time, happy reading and happy researching!

Editor's Notes #37: Dialogue Part 2—Sounding Real

This is Part 2 in a series about dialogue. If you missed reading Part 1 where I talk about regional overkill and writing accents, feel free to check it out here.

I'm not sure how this happens, but for some writers, there is a major disconnect between conversing with people in real life and writing about people conversing. Why is writing dialogue so difficult for people who talk to others on a regular basis?

I think the major hurdle for many writers to overcome is making dialogue "proper" according to grammar rules. There's only one problem with that: dialogue rarely sounds grammatically correct.

Before you write dialogue for your characters, watch people for a while, and listen to them talk. Yes, I'm asking you to stalk a little . . . for research purposes, of course. I'm willing to bet you see at least a few of the following:

• Contractions—Most people use contractions when speaking, and yet so many writers are shy about using them for dialogue. "I do not understand" sounds a lot more stiff than "I don't understand." I did edit a novel once with one character who never used contractions (much like Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation), but that was used as a distinguishing trait for a particular purpose.
• Multiple Threads at Once—Any parent can relate to this. Or anyone who's looked at a chat window between S.K. Anthony and me. More often than not, there is more than one conversation going on at once, even if there are only two people involved. Somehow, we keep it all straight; conversation is rarely linear.
• Mishearing—Conversations happen in a variety of places, and not all of them are quiet. Is your character talking on the phone, or are children playing around those talking? Someone is bound to say, "What?" at some point. My specialty, according to my husband, is talking to him from two rooms away in our house. I get a lot of responses that sound something like, "I can hear you but I can't understand you," and "You're not talking to me, are you?"
• Getting Sidetracked/Self-Interruption—These two sort of go hand in hand. I get sidetracked all the time when I'm talking, and my kids make fun of me for it. I tend to be thinking of lots of things while talking, and this results in my sentence either changing midstream, or fading off altogether. Real conversation between me and my daughter in the car:

Me: I'm so thankful . . . [gets distracted by oncoming traffic]
Ellie: [waits a few moments, then speaks] . . . for . . .?
Me: [looks around] Four what? Where?
Ellie: Thankful. For. What. What are you thankful for? You never finished.
Me: Oh . . . I'm thankful someone's picking up your brother so I don't have to.

• Body Language/Movement—These are essential in conversations. People don't stand straight at attention, facing each other to deliver their scripted lines in a tidy order. They move, they fidget, they pace, they do the dishes or fold laundry or any number of things. Sometimes their bodies reveal more than their speech does. S.K. Anthony did a four-part series on Using Body Language in Your Novel that shows how many ways your body language can help you or give away all your secrets.
• Sentence Fragments—These differ from self-interruption or getting sidetracked, in that you don't need to be sidetracked to speak in fragments. People don't converse in the manner we all had to use in high school English tests, where we had to put our answer in the form of a full sentence. "What's for supper?" "Chicken piccata." You'll hear that as an answer far more often than "For supper, I'm making chicken piccata."
• Age is Relevant—Children don't sound like adults when they speak (though they do come up with gems every so often), so don't write the six-year-old's dialogue as if she has the insight and wisdom of a sixty-year-old. Kids are pretty simple: they want things and are happy when they get them.

These examples are a fraction of the things to consider. There are awkward silences. Sometimes when people talk, they can't always recall the facts, so their speech is peppered with uncertainty and fishing around in their brains for the right word. Someone might always say, "Ya know?" between phrases.

Something I hadn't considered when writing this post is the dialogue info dump. I'm so glad I ran across this gem in an article by Janice Hardy on NowNovel. Her number one tip on writing dialogue is "Stop using dialogue for information dumps." She points out that starting a conversation with "As you know . . ." is ridiculous. If the other person knows, then why is Person #1 repeating it all? Her advice on how to tell if you're info-dumping in dialogue or not:

When characters share information, says Janice, "If the information is for the reader's benefit, chances are you're dumping. If the information is for the character's benefit (or detriment), chances are it's fine."

In the situation above, I always think of the boss who talks to his employee while perusing through the employee's file folder. "As you know, Joe, ten years ago when you were just a rookie, you took down that laundry-laundering operation singlehandedly even though your dog's cousin was going through psychotherapy for his issues with the neighbor's cat. I know that caused your divorce, but you can't keep blaming yourself by refusing to go to the laundromat."

Don't be afraid to read your dialogue aloud after you've written it . . . to "speak it out." It may sound natural or you may come to the sudden realization that it doesn't. Picture yourself saying those words to a friend (or an enemy, depending on the dialogue). Think of those awkward homemade commercials—Hey, Susan, you're looking so fit and trim! What's your secret? Is it that new 24-hour gym, Fat2Fit, at 123 Barbell Street?—and . . . don't do that.

People don't speak perfectly. Dialogue is not structured the same as a prepared speech given to a crowd, and is more often than not grammatically incorrect. Just let it happen and don't stress the specifics.

Can You See It?

When I read, one of the things I take for granted is that I can picture what's happening in the book as easily as if I were actually watching the action in front of me. Some writers make that experience richer than others, adding texture galore that rounds out the feel of things.

The ability to "see" what I'm reading is a perk for me, although it can backfire at times when a movie is made, and I'm irritated that something is "not how I pictured it at all." Of course, with books nearly always being better than their movies, I just tell myself I'm right and the movie director is horribly wrong.

A friend of mine who's an avid reader has always said, "I guess I must have no imagination, because I can never picture how anything is supposed to look when I read a book." When Fellowship of the Ring was made into a movie, I remember saying something about how so many scenes were even better than I'd pictured, and she stated that she loved seeing it because she hadn't been able to imagine any of it.

Turns out she's not lacking in imagination, or comprehension, or anything else. She simply suffers from a condition called aphantasia, the inability to conjure up visual imagery.

Doctors and scientists are only recently discovering how this works—or doesn't work—in the brain. Aphantasia may affect up to one in fifty people, so it's certainly more common than you'd think. Those who suffer from it are often unaware that most people can easily do what seems impossible for them.

As a reader, a person can compensate by focusing on the facts and descriptions of a character or a scene, even if that person can't conjure it up visually.

But what if you're an author? If your mind's eye is essentially blind, are you able to write scenes that will move your audience? Can you add the elements that stimulate all five senses in a way that's vivid enough?

Ever since I read about this a year or so ago, I've wondered if there are, indeed, authors who suffer from this, and if that's why some writers can take a scene over the top while others fall flat. Perhaps it's not immature writing or lack of skill, per se, but simply a lack of ability to see it as they write.

What do you think? When you write, do you picture the scene and write what you're seeing in your mind, or do you write the action and then go back and fill in the details? I'm curious.

Editor's Notes #24: Points of View Part 2—How Do I Choose?

My previous post began to explore points of view and how to choose which one is right for your story. Many of you said your characters dictated what POV they wanted you to write from. I'm not surprised. Though I suppose an author can have one that's more comfortable for his writing style, each story is unique and should never become a cookie-cutter presentation. Nobody wants boring and predictable, after all.

We've already explored the first-person point of view, with its advantages and limitations; the next step is to look at the third-person point of view—a commonly-used way of showing what's going on in more than one head.

The four major players are the same: author, narrator, viewpoint person, and protagonist. However, their roles are divvied up differently this time.

In the third-person POV, the author is still the author, but that's pretty much the only similarity. The narrator doesn't actually participate in the action this time. The author and the narrator in third-person POV are the same . . . but they aren't, which can be confusing. Whereas there's a clear line to divide the author from the narrator in a first-person piece (because the narrator is the viewpoint person), the narrator in a third-person story is seen by the reader in a different light.

Harvey Chapman (from the Writers After Dark link I shared last time) explains it like this:

The author of a novel is a real-life person who has made up the events and written the words. 

But in order to feel like what we are reading actually happened, [we] readers need to forget about the author and imagine instead that the words have been written by a kind of invisible witness to the events—a person with godlike powers, perhaps, who can look down upon reality from above and describe it to the readers. 

The crucial point here is that this godlike narrator, as unlikely as such a figure might be, witnesses something that actually happened—whereas authors merely write about events they have made up. 

And so readers will ignore the author's name on the novel's cover and imagine instead that they are being told about the events by someone who actually witnessed them firsthand.

Also unlike the first-person POV, the narrator is not the story's viewpoint person. The narrator in a third-person POV is basically someone who gets us from here to there: this happened, and let me tell you all about it. Otherwise, narrating is kind of a thankless job: readers care about the characters, not the narrator . . . so, dear Narrator Person, please don't give us your opinion. Just enough facts so we can picture it all in our heads, and then step aside so the characters can speak.

Next is the viewpoint character, but the third part of this three-part series deals with viewpoint, so I'll only touch on it here. In short, if you tell the story through one person's eyes, there's a single viewpoint. If you choose to write from multiple viewpoints, different sections or chapters will feature different eyes to see through—aka different viewpoints. This deserves a good deal of detail, so look for it in my next post in two weeks.

Finally, the protagonist comes into play. The protagonist in a third-person POV novel is the leading or central character. The character the book is written about. The main attraction. The big Kahuna. He or she is the entire reason we're reading this story.

The protagonist may or may not be the viewpoint character. If you have a single viewpoint, then the protagonist will most definitely be your viewpoint character. However, if you have multiple viewpoints, there's no guarantee that these two roles will mesh. Imagine reading a novel based on two of my favorite cartoon characters, Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy (yes, I'm an unapologetic fan of SpongeBob). Mermaid Man may be the protagonist, but perhaps his adventure is told through Barnacle Boy's eyes. Sidekicks come in handy that way. And since sidekicks typically idolize the heroes whose sides they're kicking, it might be a pretty good gig to have if you're the hero, because your story from his view will make you sound even better than you are. Unless you have a rotten, bitter sidekick who has always wanted to be #1 but you've never given him the chance to shine. In that case, "interesting" is probably the best you can hope for.

Until next time, I'd love to hear your thoughts. Not all of them . . . just the good ones.

Editor's Notes #23: Points of View Part 1—How Do I Choose?

I have this glass (from one of my favorite websites, Despair, Inc., home of demotivational everything), and in addition to always making me smile, it reminds me that different people can look at the same thing in a variety of ways. Often, this helps to fill out the bigger picture of an issue. Other times, it only serves to confuse things, like when writing a book.

It takes real talent to write from multiple points of view. Some people do it without even realizing it, but that's not what we're discussing today. Well, maybe we'll use those people as bad examples, but for now, the ones we're talking about today and next time are those writers who actually do it on purpose.

When an author sits down to put pen to paper—or fingers to keyboard, or crayon to napkin, or Sharpie to forearm—the story that flows usually takes on a voice that's easily discernible. Sometimes it's in the form of a first-person narrative, sometimes a third-person "outside voice."

There is no "right choice" that an author can make for every occasion. Each book's POV choice should be as individual as its plotline. It all depends on what you hope to accomplish, and that's where a few guidelines help.

I recently read an article featured on the Writers After Dark website, titled "The Complete Guide to Point of View," by Harvey Chapman. Not only did the post feature the two most common points of view (first person and third person), but it linked to another article (same author) which explained the logic behind the different choices. According to Chapman, many authors are tempted to skip the fundamentals and simply look at the pros and cons, but there are a few things which should be understood before choosing.

The theory and logic behind choosing a point of view boils down to the roles of four people: the author, the narrator, the viewpoint character, and the protagonist. Now of course, the author is the author, but the narrator (the one who tells the story as compared to the one who writes the story) takes on a different role, depending on the POV chosen.

In the first-person POV, the narrator is also the viewpoint character. We see what he sees, but only what he sees. This can keep things simple and focused, but can also be tricky in a few ways. Anything that happens "offscreen," so to speak, can only be learned through conversation or eavesdropping. In other words, if the main viewpoint character wasn't there, it didn't happen . . . unless the event is discovered through other means.

First-person narrative also has the tendency to give us a not-so-objective "truth" as we read along. Think of any occasion where there is more than one person. There will be, of course, more than one opinion, and each person is sure his is the right one.

Chapman's article points out another interesting aspect of the first-person narrative: because a first-person narrator/viewpoint person is retelling something that happened in the past, the viewpoint may change, depending on whether that action or event happened in the immediate past or many years ago. As he states, ". . . if a forty-year-old adult tells us something that happened to him as a thirteen-year-old kid, that makes the narrator twenty-seven years older than the viewpoint person. And which of us can claim to be the same person at forty as we were at thirteen?"

The first-person narrator/viewpoint person may also be the protagonist, but this not a hard and fast rule. The person telling the story may just as easily be recounting a tale that happened to his best friend.

The important part is to know why you're choosing the point of view you're working with, and the rest should sort itself out much easier as the writing progresses.

Part 2 of this post will explain these roles (author, narrator, viewpoint person, protagonist) in the context of the third-person point of view.

Do you have a favorite POV to write from, do you have to think about it at great length, or does each book just present itself to you with a POV already chosen by the characters? I'm curious.

Editor's Notes #22: The Importance of Having a Critique Partner

If we are honest with ourselves, we would always choose to believe our work is great. I mean, what's not to love? We're creative. We're innovative. We think of things no one else can possibly come up with, because we're smarter than all of them.

BUT . . . what if . . . what if, in fact, we're capable of error? Not us, of course, but all those other people: the ones who are not us. What if our their ideas are not as genius as they first appeared to be during those late-night writing sessions? Who is there to shout, "The emperor has no clothes!" when it needs to be said?

Your critique partner, that's who.

Everyone needs at least one. Sometimes more than one, but definitely not zero. Critique partners are often the only thing stopping a person from making a huge mistake, sometimes with a simple phrase like, "When reading your manuscript, I noticed something . . ."

What is a critique partner? A CP is someone with whom you trade manuscripts with the intention of reading and offering suggestions to each other for improvement. Ideally, that person should be an author. Even more important, he should be an author who writes at least as well as you do if not better. A critique partner needs to be able to look at your work from a number of angles and give sound advice and suggestions on how to improve.

This is not to say that your critique partner can't be a cheerleader, but the biggest, most important qualification when seeking one is honesty. Are they willing to be honest with you so your work will improve, even if it might make you temporarily unhappy? If they write in the same genre as you do, will they allow a competitive spirit to cloud their judgement? Face it: you don't need someone to tell you how he would have written it. You need that person to tell you how to improve what you've already written and called your own. They should be able to sprinkle praise in the middle of it all, but if the feedback is all at one end of the spectrum or the other, it won't be nearly as helpful.

Critique partners are a gentle way of thickening your skin for the not-nearly-as-kind reviewers out there. If no one has ever read your work prior to publishing, or if you've only ever had attaboys from friends and family, then that first negative review just may crush you.

Hey, it's even biblical: "Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses" is right smack dab there in the middle of Proverbs (27:6, if you don't trust me and want to look it up). You need to be able to trust the person to love you enough to hurt you, which is an odd concept, but honesty from a friendly voice is always easier to handle when you know that person risks much by their honesty.

Critique partners can be many things, but I'd say "invaluable" is the best way to describe them.

Do you have a critique partner? More than one? Never heard of the concept? Do you go through them like they're disposable? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Y = Years of Writing Doesn't Mean Your Book is Done

I’ve heard premature publishers, when confronted with criticism of their books, say, “But I’ve been writing this book for years! I just couldn’t wait another minute to publish!”

Some people write fast; others write more slowly. Some writers get it right during the second draft; others go through their work piece by piece, dozens of times. Everyone goes at his own pace. If your book isn’t ready, it’s not ready. Period. And if someone tells you it shouldn’t have been published yet, then no excuses on your part will give them back the hours they spent reading it. 

Take your time to get it right, but if you’ve been working for years on the same thing and it’s still not fit for public viewing, then take a step back and evaluate why. Are you burnt out on the book? Do you want to move on to something else but don’t want to trash the sheer volume of hours you’ve put into this book? Set it aside for a little while and write something for fun. Heck, write another book that flows easier. Maybe you’ll come back to your original project refreshed, and maybe it will sit in the drawer for years before you want to revisit it. Maybe absence will help it to rearrange itself in your mind so your path is clearer when you go back to it.

When it’s done, it’s done. And if it’s not, don’t publish yet. 

T = Take a Step Back

Once you’ve written your first draft, get away from it for a short bit. Some say a week; some say a month or two. I don’t know that the length of time matters as much as the distance itself.

When you’ve invested the time and effort into writing a story that your own mind created, it’s hardly surprising that you’re not objective about it. The story is great! The characters are great! Your working title is . . . yep, great! Everything is shooting out rainbows, unicorns are prancing across the page, and you can hear Morgan Freeman reading for your audiobook.

If you give it a little rest, though, you’ll find it’s easier to spot the things that need work. Something that sounds great at three a.m. often looks a bit less special by the light of day. Your manuscript is no different.

In the same way, if you’re struggling to make things “fit” in your story, walk away and focus on something else. If you have another story idea with characters in your head, saying, “Write me next,” then write up an outline and some basic points you want to cover. It might be exactly what you need to get the creativity on track once again. Absence makes the heart grow fonder, after all. You’ll go back to the main project ready to go with a fresh attitude.

S = Save Up Your Money and Don't Skip the Final Edits

If you’ve invested in a copy editor, great! Your manuscript will benefit. If your copy editor does (as I do) copy edits and final proof, don’t skip that final step. It’s worth the small amount of money for the peace of mind it will bring.

The temptation might gnaw at you to skip the final proof. After all, it might save you those extra dollars, and it’s probably not needed, right? Well . . . it might and it might not.

The final proof ensures that, as far as is humanly possible, nothing was missed that should have been corrected. Whether it’s as insignificant as an extra space between words or as important as a character’s name change, a misspelling of a word, or a missing apostrophe, that final run-through is essential. The manuscript should be in good shape, unless something completely catastrophic happened. I don't know what goes on once the first round of edits leaves my hands: maybe the author didn't know how to approve the changes, maybe he only looked at the big red marks and not the small ones, or maybe she forgot to save the file, and none of the changes were actually made. This takes care of the "did I turn off the oven before leaving the house?" moment in the publishing world.

I believe I have a good eye for detail, but I’m often surprised at the number of “how did I miss that?” moments I have during the final proof of a book. There aren’t a huge lot of them, but even one or two per chapter makes me glad for one last opportunity to get it right.

R = Revise, Revise, Revise

Consider everything you write as a first draft. Write with the intention of changing things later, for cohesiveness, details, consistency, and sensory input. Can you see it? Can you smell it? Can you hear it? Who’s talking? Can you tell by the dialogue? Is your dialogue appropriate to the time period or geological region?

Does your plot make sense? Does your first page capture the reader’s interest? Is your word count too big? Too small? Do you have clichés? Are you telling, or are you showing? Does everyone fit well into the big picture? Are there too many unnecessary characters?

Once that first draft is written, that’s when the real work gets underway. To take a good idea and turn it into a great manuscript is more than just a one-shot deal. The best of writers go over their work numerous times, and it shows. Their work may sound like it just flowed out of them, ready to go, but you can rest assured they worked hard to get it that way, and it wasn’t by typing “The End” and closing the file.

In the construction business, they say, “Measure once, cut twice.” I think in the publishing business, they should say, “Write once, sell once,” because if your first draft is what goes to print, you won’t have any repeat customers. You might fool them once, but . . . well, you know the rest.

P = Precision

I have trouble with this. I blame my mother’s Italian heritage. We take ten words to explain something others could have done with three. We give the backstory for every answer, regardless of what the actual question involved. Faster than a speeding bullet, our hands fly through the air as we describe yet another event with a combination of story and mime. Tangents are our specialty, you might say.

Writers need to be precise whenever possible. If you can say it in three words, use three words. If you can simplify, do it. No one wants to read the thesaurus written in novel form. Your prose can be descriptive without being purple. I remember reading Tess of the D’Urbervilles years ago (one of the saddest, most depressing books I’ve ever read, by the way), and realizing, after a particularly verbose passage, that Tess had been raped. The prose was so ambiguous and wordy that I almost didn’t grasp the seriousness of the most important turning point in her life.

If your readers have to reread passages to figure out what you’ve just said, then maybe it’s time to say it in simpler fashion.

O = Obstinacy Never Sold Any Books

This sort of goes with yesterday’s post, although this one refers more to the pre-publication stage. The most polished and successful authors have a host of people who read their work prior to publication, whether for content and plot, or for typos, punctuation and grammar issues. These authors have learned to deal with others who sometimes ruthlessly say, “This has to be cut,” or “This makes no sense,” or even “Kill off this character; she’s doing your book no favors.”

Self-publishers, in many cases, have never had to deal with that type of criticism, no matter how constructively it’s phrased. When they show their work to someone (anyone), the typical result is praise, simply for having written a book. This is not to be confused with an informed opinion. (See letter “F” post about friends being cheerleaders only.)

A critique partner, beta reader, or editor has nothing to gain by telling the truth about bad writing, other than a clean conscience. Nobody seeks to hurt anyone’s feelings. Feelings, in fact, have nothing to do with the rules of writing. Those who cling too tightly to what they’ve written and refuse to fix errors will either sell no books (after someone reads their poorly written sample), or will sell only one book per person, with no repeat customers (after someone, having skipped the sample, reads their poorly written book).

Be open to criticism, especially if many people mention the same things in their criticism. They just might have something you can use.

M = Make the Most of Free Advice on Writers' Forums

If you ask for advice, and someone offers it to you, take it. Take it, write it down, and follow it, especially if more than one person is giving you the same advice. 

Don’t ask for advice and then ignore it. 

Don’t ask for advice and then give a list of reasons why you can’t/won’t/don’t need to follow it. 

Don’t ask for advice and tell the more experienced person he’s wrong.

I feel like Forrest Gump now, because that’s all I have to say about that.

K = Know the Rules in Order to Break Them for Effect

Knowing the rules doesn’t mean they have to be followed stringently. Most dialogue doesn’t follow Ze Proper English, and shouldn’t have to, unless you’re writing a book called How to Speak Uncomfortably to Others. Come to think of it, I’ve read books that should have carried that title.

You can use slang if you want to get jiggy. (And okay, now I’m laughing pretty hard, because that is SO not what I would say and I suddenly feel 100 years old while typing it.) Prepositions are sometimes all right to end sentences with. And you can begin a sentence with a conjunction. You can apply the oft-misused Random Capitalization. If you wish, use clichés until the cows come home. Even . . . yep, incomplete sentences. You can do all these things, as long as you are using them for a particular reason, and you are aware that you’re breaking rules.

It’s the unsuspecting people who need to be careful. The phrase, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” attributed to George Santayana (and repeated in various forms by Edmund Burke, Winston Churchill, and others), can be changed to the literary version: “Those who do not know the rules are bound to break them.”  

It all goes in order: learn them well, then break them sparingly. You don’t want to be breaking so many rules that your readers begin to wonder if you ever learned any to begin with. 

J = "Just Get it Out There and Fix it Later" is Bad Advice

I can’t count how many times I’ve heard someone say, “I know it still needs work, but I’ve gone over it again and again, and I just can’t wait any longer. I can hire an editor to go over it after I have some profits from sales.”

Not only is that foolish, but it’s just bad business. You only get one chance to make a first impression. In regular life, you might meet someone who makes a bad first impression on you, but who gradually rises to a better status in your eyes as you get to know her better. Perhaps she was having a bad day when you first saw her, and wasn’t acting in her typical cheery fashion.

In the book world, you’re not likely to have someone give you a second chance if the first impression isn’t a favorable one. The reader gave you a chance already and didn’t care for what she read. She may have paid good money to not care for what she read. She’s not going to give you another dime if she can help it, because she does not know you personally, does not have to interact with you on a daily basis, and owes you nothing. She may even insist YOU owe HER something: a refund for a not-edited, poorly written book.

If you’re waiting for profits to pay for post-publishing edits, you’re doing it all backward.

I = Ignorance Is NOT Bliss

“I don’t want to know.” 

“I’m better off not knowing.” 

This may actually apply in some circumstances; e.g., if there’s a meteor hurtling toward your town, and you’re in your basement, folding laundry. Why experience those final moments of terror? Ignorance is preferred in this case, because suddenly experiencing death by meteorite is probably better than knowing it’s coming and waiting for it with a large towel over your head.

That’s probably the only time I can think of that it would be better not to have all the available information. Certainly, when writing a book, ignorance can result in the exact opposite of bliss. If you don’t know your craft, you need to learn it before deciding to write the Great American Novel. If you don’t know enough to capitalize the word “I” or proper names, if you can’t tell a noun from a verb, if you don’t know that each speaker change gets a new paragraph, if you . . . *shudder* . . . don’t know “to” from “too,” then no. Ignorance is the worst kind of hell, for your readers if no one else.

And if someone who does know offers to enlighten you? Take it. Become a sponge and absorb all the helpful information you can. Don’t presume to tell the helpful person you’d rather do it your way, when it’s obvious your way is wrong. It’s hard enough for someone to offer advice when they know feelings may be hurt; accept it for the loving gesture it is.

E = Editing Comes in Many Forms

Someone who's “looking for an editor” is most likely referring to the need for a copyeditor. There are, however, a few types of editors to choose from, and it’s best to know what you’re looking for if you want to get your publishing budget set up accurately.

Developmental editors work with you from the very beginning. If you have a concept or a great story idea but aren’t sure how to execute it, a developmental editor can help you organize your thoughts, give suggestions to aid your research, and help you get a handle on the big picture. They’ll spot when your writing isn’t clear, your characters are weak, when your plot has holes, and when timelines don’t add up properly.

Line editors/copyeditors come into play when the text is nearly final—or as final as an author can get it on his own. This type carefully reads each sentence, correcting structure, typos, spelling, punctuation, word usage, and grammar. They’ll alert you to stilted dialogue and inconsistent character details.

Proofreaders take the final look at your project. They ensure all the copyeditor’s changes were implemented, and fix any typos that may have been missed during the initial copyedit.

Each type of editing comes with its own price structure, so it’s best to know what you need before rushing right out there. Many authors think they only need a "light proof," but actually need a developmental editor for a manuscript that’s not yet ready for even the copyeditor. Know your strengths, but also recognize your weaknesses and set your budget accordingly.