March 2014 | Busybird Publishing

Archives

Getting Organised: Part II

March 27, 2014

Your Folders

Last week’s blog might’ve seemed absurdly condescending, but it’s astounding the amount of writers who don’t think ahead when it comes to the administration of their files. They’re so focused on the act of writing that it’s almost as if they believe the rest will take care of itself.

It’s not just their filenames, but also where they’ve saved their files. I’ve seen writers who have to trawl through their computer (or computers) to find whatever they’re working on. Did it save in My Documents? Or maybe it was on the Desktop? Again, here lies madness.

It doesn’t cost anything to get organised, and it can save you a lot of heartache.

Firstly, do not save your files directly into My Documents. Operating systems (whether they be PCs or Macs) use My Documents as a default dumping ground for other standards, e.g. My Pictures, My Kindle Stuff, and so on. You don’t want your files where they’re not getting exclusive attention.

Create a folder just for your writing in My Documents. You can call it whatever you like. E.g.

My Writing

At least then you know exactly where all your work will go. But the segregation doesn’t end there. Because you don’t want to open My Writing and see (using basic filenames) …

That’s messy. Also, it gives you no idea about your volume of work in each field. Time to break down your directory structure into further folders. Yes, folders. E.g.

Now we’ve covered most types of writing. We could push it further if we wrote in other fields, e.g. Novellas. As an aside, there is no Novel folder. Why’s it covered just as Books? Because you might’ve written a novel, a nonfiction book, and an autobiography. Each of these could have their own folder, but it seems (even by my insane standards) excessive to have single folders for each field when that folder might contain only one work. Better to have them listed under Books, which covers Novels, Nonfiction, and Autobiographies and any other sort of book you might write. (Of course, if you’ve written ten novels, eight books of nonfiction, and five novellas, you might consider that continuing segregation.)

The point is we’re trying to give everything you’re working on its own logical home. This is something we can keep pushing.

Let’s use our Stories folder as an example. Instead of opening it and seeing all your stories lumped there together, how about giving each story its own folder? E.g.

And so it’d continue, a folder for each story.

For stories, I’d keep all the drafts in their own story folder. So if I open the Finding Truths folder I might see:

The same applies to our other folders. If we open them, they should contain a folder for each individual piece of work.

Let’s say we open the Books folder – we might see this …

The Fascinating Life of Iguanas might be a nonfiction book I’m working on, For the Method and Through the Waterfall novels, The Other Me an autobiography. This is one of the few places I’d rely on my own memory to distinguish them, although if you wanted you specify:

That’s up to you.

With books – if I’ve reworked them extensively – I might give each rewrite/restructure its own folder. E.g.

That’s just my preferences, hinged on my burgeoning compulsions.

Blogs would have to be ordered differently, because you’d want to keep a structure of the dates they went up in. E.g. You might’ve written a blog ‘Visiting the Great Wall’ on 1st February, ‘Braying for Fun’ on 14th February, and ‘Aardvarks and Me’ on the 28th February. If you let your computer do the sorting, it’ll have:

But that’s not the order they were written in. You could have the computer sort them by date, but again, that’s changing the way the things operate by default for just one directory.

Here, I do finagle, giving each its own folder, but numbering it. E.g.

This is where we use computers’ numerical sorting against them, (which – no doubt – will thwart their inevitable takeover of the world). The files themselves I wouldn’t (prefix with a) number. They’d be named as they’ve been established. Once they’re in their folders, they sort themselves.

If you have additional material for anything you’ve written, give it its own folder within that piece’s main folder. So, for example …

And as with naming your files, name the files which have come back from friends. E.g.

Finding Truths (Draft 1.04) [with Blaise’s comments].doc

Again, it’s logical, it’s orderly – I know whose feedback it contains, and which draft they’re providing feedback on.

There you have it.

It might seem incredibly inane, but it keeps everything in order, and whether that’s what you want or not, it’s what you need.

Keep everything as neatly sorted as possible. You’ll only berate yourself if you can’t find where things have gone, or which file is meant to be which.

L.Z.

The Evolving Idea

March 24, 2014

Recently, I received an email notifying me that a short story of mine will be included in an upcoming anthology from Writer’s Edit (www.writersedit.com). I’m always excited about being able to chalk up a successful submission – especially as this has broken a longer-than-usual dry spell for fiction – but on this occasion it also made me think about the journey that story took. ‘Ghost Writer’, the story to be included in this anthology, has the second-longest gestation period than any other idea I’ve ever had.*

I first wrote ‘Ghost Writer’ in 2005. I was still finding my feet as a writer, and ‘Ghost Writer’ was a way in which I blended some of my own perspective as an emerging writer alongside a unique scenario. It also had terrible (read: really terrible) poetry. I still have a copy. And no, you can’t have it. Ever.

I never did anything proactive with that first version, but since 2010 I’ve been trying to bring the idea back to life in several different versions. In total, it took nearly nine years to turn this idea, this one short story that was never above 3000 words, into a successful piece of writing.

For me, there are three lessons to be taken from the nine-year process it’s taken to make this one particular story a winner.

1) Perseverance is important. I’d often thought about throwing the idea away for good. I’ve done the same with many other old stories from the same period in my career. And yet ‘Ghost Writer’ stayed in my folio as an in-progress. Sometimes, the gut feeling that an idea will pay off once it finds the right words is something you just have to go with, even if it seems hopeless to re-draft yet again. Of course, it doesn’t always pay off. But sometimes it does. Maybe the reward at the end won’t be worth the time put into the numerous re-drafts. But it’s still a success, and still immensely satisfying. Either way, it will have been an immeasurably educational journey.

2) Ideas often need to evolve before they work. There’s a lot to be said for sitting on an idea for a while, taking the time to work on other projects before coming back and seeing the old content with fresh eyes. Sometimes the break is only a week, but it could also be a year or more. The angle taken by the first version of an idea might be decent, but not making the most of the material. Maybe the story is being told from the wrong character’s perspective. Maybe that middle scene where the characters are drinking and talking in exposition really isn’t a necessary part of the story. Having patience with your own ideas is as important as being doggedly perseverant in working that idea to within an inch of its life.

3) There’s value in everything you write. Everything can be made into a good story – a good piece of writing. Keep optimistic about your own writing. The day you can’t find faith in your own work is the day you need to step back and forget about being a writer for a while. You’ll write a lot of crap. And some of that crap will be so flawed as to be practically unsalvageable. But maybe there’s a little nugget that can be taken from it. A certain character. A plot twist. A line of dialogue that could lead into a totally new idea. Whatever it may be, that worthless crap just became fertilizer. Grow something from it.

I was lucky in that ‘Ghost Writer’, despite the constant changes to virtually every story element, still kept the same medium and most of the same characters. Sometime it takes a lot more renovation. That novel you’ve been trying to write? Maybe it’s not meant to be a novel. Maybe it’s meant to be a novella. Or a screenplay. Or interpretive dance.

Ideas, whether they’ve been formed over months of rumination or a burst of chaotic energy, always have the potential to evolve. To see that happen, you need to tend to that idea with those three qualities in mind: perseverance, patience and optimism.

Be sure to leave stories of your own experiences with long-running and lingering ideas in the comments below. How long have you worked a certain idea or story before it was accepted? What kind of changes did those ideas have to go through before they found their ideal skin?

Beau Hillier | Editor, page seventeen

*Incidentally, the longest-running idea I’ve ever worked with is a children’s fantasy novel I first penned about fifteen years ago and was effectively my first activity as a writer – I still hold hope of reviving the material in some fashion. It’s terribly paced, filled with plot holes and has action scenes ripped from a bad anime, but I still love it more than any offspring I’ll ever have.

Getting Organised: Part I

March 20, 2014

Naming Your Files

Here’s something which shouldn’t be so hard. Yet it is.

And it makes me angry.

How do you name your files when you’re writing? Well, that should be simple. How about this?

The Title of My Blog.doc

There. That’s easy. What else would you call it?

What about when you revise it? What do you call it then? Some people will call it this …

The Title of My Blog.doc

That’s right. They’ll save right over the top of the old file. To this practice, I can say only two things …

WHAT? ARE YOU #&@!ING CRAZY!?

What happens if you mess up? What if you had a passage just right, you tweak it, mess it up, and can’t recall how you had it previously? How do you get it back? Time travel? What if you redraft numerous times, and need to go back three or four drafts to check on something – how do you manage that now? To the people who do this with their files, go sit in the corner for five minutes, then come back and resume reading. Go. Now.

Others might have a cleverer approach, something like this for their new version …

The Title of My Blog (New).doc

It’s infallible. How can you go wrong? And the next revision might be:

The Title of My Blog (Newer).doc

And the next one might be one:

The Title of My Blog (Newest).doc

We could go on forever and whilst there’s some logic in it, there’s no real order, or capacity for multiple revisions – and, hey, this is writing. You might go through nine or ten drafts. I’ve gone through thirty or so with some short stories. Can you find that many variations of ‘New’?

Others might do this:

The Title of My Blog (Revised).doc

Et al. Again, same problems. Words are powerful when used correctly, but for this sort of cataloguing they can be both limiting and confusing.

Some of you might be shaking your heads, condemning the folly of people who name their files like this. You might think yourselves logical. You might use something like this:

The Title of My Blog – 26 January 2014.doc

There you go, a date delineating the draft. When you open the folder containing your piece, you’d hope to see this:

That works, doesn’t it?

NO!

Most computers will list file names numerically. So, when you open the folder containing your files, it’ll actually look like this:

There’s the numerical sequence: 1, 2, 10, 24, 26. This will also hinder any attempt to use a numeric date, e.g. instead of 1 February 2014, using 1.02.2014. We’ll just get similar sorting. Also, you literally have to wade through every file to work out which is the most recent. Here, it’s the third file – and this is just a little list! What if we had twenty files to sort through?

Of course, we could have our computer sort our files by date, but why complicate issues? We should be making our lives as simple as possible.

How about if we put the month before the date? E.g.

The Title of My Blog – February 1, 2014.doc

How does this look when we open our folder?

The computer – as computers do – sorts the files alphabetically. At least now the numerical sorting keeps those dates (within each month) in order, although that doesn’t do us much good overall when February comes before January.

Another issue with these methods is we don’t know how many drafts there’s been. We can’t look at all the variations of ‘New’, or all the dates, and know instantaneously that we’ve written five drafts. We actually have to count them up.

What we want is a method that lets us know, at a glance, which file is the newest and how many drafts we’ve gone through.

Here’s my method, beginning with my first file:

The Title of My Blog (Draft 1.01).doc

1, meaning it’s my first draft. .01, meaning it’s the first version of that draft. Then, when I revise, it’s:

The Title of My Blog (Draft 1.02).doc

When I open my folder, my files will be presented thus:

All nice and neat.

This might seem like it’s unnecessarily complicating the issue. Why not just name them …?

Firstly, the length of file names changes when I go into double digits. E.g.

It’s just a little thing, but it annoys me. I want things neat and aligned. The way to mitigate this would be to precede all the single numerals with a zero …

Now they’re aligned.

But the problem still here is there’s no marked way of distinguishing between a redraft and a restructure or a rewrite. The differences?

redraft: going over your piece from word one and revising
restructure: chopping out whole sections, writing in whole new chapters that weren’t there before, shifting things around
rewrite: opening a NEW document, and rewriting your piece from the very first word.

When I begin a restructure of a rewrite then I bump up the first digit and reset the decimal. E.g.

The Title of My Blog (Draft 2.01)

This is the first draft of the rewrite, (and one that bears little structural similarity to its predecessor).

In a folder, I might see something like this:

This tells me immediately that there were five drafts, then I either started from scratch, or restructured the hell out of it. It might require quick mathematics to know how many drafts overall if I have something like this …

… but it’s not too hard to add .05 and .03 to get 8.

Finally, for any editors reading, when the author sends you their file, make sure you distinguish it from the file you work on. E.g.

The file marked ‘(original)’ will always stand out alone as what the author sent me.

Ultimately, you don’t have to use this system. Just make sure that you do use a system, and it’s one that’s orderly – both for your computer and yourself.

L.Z.

Hurdles, Kitties and Too Many Food References

March 17, 2014

There’s plenty of material on ‘being’ a writer. A library worth of books has been written on how to become a writer, how to improve one’s craft and the best ways for emerging writers to become established. Everyone has their own dollar to throw into the kitty when it comes to passing down advice to would-be writers and emerging talent in search of guidance or quick tips.

Why should I be the exception?

In my own development as a writer and editor, and in the natural development of fellow writers I’ve kept in regular contact with, there have been some turning points that have stood out to me. The challenge is different for everyone, but the markers for development are often the same. Here are some of the common hurdles I believe that, once overcome, mark massive developments in one’s writing career.

Finding the right confidence
This one is basically a no-brainer. But I still wanted to bring it up if only because the no-brainers are usually the ones that slip past the radar.

Having either too little or too much confidence are both common problems for writers, regardless of their level of development. Too little confidence leads to unfinished stories and writer’s block. Too much confidence leads to stunted development and an unwillingness to accept criticism or edits.

Keeping the right level of confidence is a daily challenge – propping yourself up enough to keep pumping out content and not getting bogged down in how unforgivably bad it might be, while keeping grounded and able to take feedback without launching into vicious self-defence.

Writing is subjective and highly variable. That means everything ever written is hit and miss – emphasis on that and between the two polar opposites. Even the piece you’ve been working on for months and consider your current magnum opus. Keep telling yourself that what you’re writing down is good – not horrible (because then you’ll stop writing out of depression), not brilliant (because it’s not), but good. And remember that every piece of feedback, every proposed edit, is a potential bullet-point for improvement.

Cooking the same meal every night
I like risotto. I cook a pretty good risotto, especially with chicken and mushroom. My partner loves it (or she at least she says she does – I’ll take the compliment at face value). But no matter how fluffy the rice, it’s not going to go down well if I cooked risotto every night. Occasionally she’s going to want me to at least serve up steak and chips. Or order pizza.

Thank God she’s a better cook than me.

Point being, variety is the spice of life. Keep your signature dish – and make sure you’re so good at it that no one can compare – but make sure there’s more to your skill range than historical romance or family drama, especially in short stories. The short story market is always starving for versatility, and even in the genre markets you can only get away with working the same ideas/angle/characters for so long.

The best result is that experimenting with different dishes opens up a whole new world of opportunities – some ingredients you never would have thought to try in your staple dishes. Good fantasy writing can sometimes come from experimenting with thrillers, as another method of inciting high stakes and excitement. Writing historical fiction, even if not your preference, often forces you to think more about setting and tone, which is universally beneficial. And so on.

Some experiments will be total failures that would be better served never seeing the light of day. But who cares? You stepped out of your comfort zone. You tried something new. And maybe you’ll find another form of writing you’re good at and enjoy that you would never have considered without the trial run.

Taking it all too seriously
Yes, this is a problem in my view. This includes being preoccupied with the importance of a piece, the intended weight of the themes and how it connects to the quote-unquote ‘zeitgeist’ – to the detriment of all the other elements of a good story.

It’s fine for a piece of writing to have serious themes. But if you’re writing a short story then you’re a storyteller. If you can tell a story that happens to revolve around the issue of deforestation in Tasmania, that’s fantastic; it’s an intriguing subject, it’s topical and it’s a strong stepping stone for conflict and interesting events. But it’s still a story – a piece of prose seeking an audience to entertain. Articles and creative non-fiction exist for a reason – to give an appropriate platform for seeking an audience to educate and convince on a particular viewpoint.

Fictional prose can still be serious, weighted, tied in with the big issues of the day. The tipping point is where the ‘why’ overwhelms the ‘what’ – where the agenda eclipses the actual story and its events. Audiences rarely have much patience for self-importance. They want a story. And the best writers place any agenda or issue they wish to discuss in service to the story. Not the other way around.

There are many more mini-epiphanies a writer will have throughout the early stages of their career – I’ve only covered the ones that strike me as among the most important. Please leave your comments and any other turning points you’ve experienced through your development. A little bit of collective wisdom never hurts.

– Beau Hillier.

Audiobooks vs Print Books

March 13, 2014

Confessions of an Audiobook Listener

Audiobooks feel like cheating, like somehow listening is easier than reading. I am always careful not to laugh or pull faces when listening in public and when chatting about books, it feels like a lie to say, ‘At the moment I’m reading …’ but embarrassing to admit the truth. If I’m listening in the car and need to open the window, I turn down the volume.

There is a certain amount of stigma attached to audiobooks. They are terminally uncool. I know this because my mum has listened to them for years. That alone should be enough of a reason to banish me to hardcopy only or hide my audio habits behind a veil of secrecy. But here I am coming out and confessing …

I am pro audiobooks.

Now, don’t get me wrong – I love books too. And as someone who dabbles at writing I can’t deny fantasising about seeing my name and words in print, holding my book in my hands, or admiring it displayed on a shelf. Somehow, a disc or file name doesn’t hold the same awe factor.

But there is no reason why the two mediums can’t be used simultaneously. The lack of popularity is due to lack of education and people are simply not aware of their options. Personally, I find it rewarding to be reading and listening to different works at the same time. I will often have three or four on the go at once – one for the car, one for the Discman or iPod, one by the bed, and one for the train. So, I still read, but these days I find that I’m only choosing books that aren’t available on audio.

My mum averages about two audiobooks every three weeks. Since I jumped on the bandwagon, I’ve infected other members of my family. Despite the different ages, attitudes, and lifestyles, audio has a definite appeal.

It’s time for a brainstorm, time to look at the pros and cons and announce the Championship Fight: Audiobooks vs. Hardcopy books. Bring it on.

Spoken audio has been available since the 1930s but it wasn’t until the 1980s that the medium attracted book retailers. Audiobooks, once distributed on cassette tapes, are now available on CD, downloadable digital formats for portable devices and preloaded digital.

The ‘experience’ of reading a book or listening to one being read varies for everyone. Some find audiobooks too slow and that they can read faster themselves while others find audio relaxing and requires less effort, which allows them to be drawn into the story. The two methods stimulate and engage in entirely different ways.

Audio appeals to the multi-tasker. Unlike books, you can easily listen while remaining mobile and productive. It is a perfect distraction for the reluctant exerciser and stimulating on long car drives or on public transport when sardine carriages make holding a book awkward. It accompanies housework, craft, cooking, gardening or any other monotonous or passive task. You feel like you’re working your brain rather than just filling in time or silence as you might with music. For those who struggle to have time or motivation for reading, with an audiobook you can trick yourself into thinking you are not really reading at all. It is less a chore and more entertainment.

People relax by plonking themselves down in front of the television and switching off their brains, letting bad jokes and soppy drama wash over them. Audios can have a similar purpose and effect. And there is still the sense of satisfaction when finished – similar to reading – that is not often found at the end of a night of watching television.

There is a convenience and flexibility to audio and the right voice can bring the story and characters to life. Also, listening can often soften the blow of an otherwise daunting read. What might appear large or overwhelmingly literary in book form, can – in audio – push you through until you’re hooked, thus not allowing you to get lost or bogged down by slabs of text or complicated vocabulary.

But they have problems too. A few scratches can completely ruin a disc and the momentum of the story can be lost similarly to ripping out some pages a book. For those who are easily distracted you can find you lose concentration and miss important details and if you are a person who reads in bed, unfortunately an audio will not stop when you fall asleep.

The biggest factor for audiobooks is the voice, which can be the difference between loving it and not finishing it. If the person has an accent you can have trouble understanding or following. The voice could be annoying and grating. Their tone can influence your view of the characters, they can change the mood of the story and can influence whether you like the book.

Those who listen on CDs are restricted to the car or an often bulky Discman. As this technology is becoming outdated the selection for purchase is limited. Luckily now there are MP3 CD options and downloadable formats but there are many people who don’t have the knowledge or ability to search and download. It is unfortunate that the medium is not more widely marketed and accessible or promoted.

Downloadable audiobooks cost slightly less than hardcovers but more than their paperback equivalents. Market penetration of audiobooks is substantially lower than for their printed counterparts despite the high market penetration achieved by audio music products.

Aesthetically, an audiobook is lightweight, encased in plastic and has a cheap, tacky feel whereas books have a pleasurable physicality and give a tactile sense of place and pacing which can build expectation as the reader progresses. There is a certain satisfaction to holding a book. Solid and meaningful. The smell, the visual impression of a bookshelf full of tomes, all hold something beautiful that is irreplaceable.

Hardcopy format make it easier to revisit and locate particular parts or passages, do not rely on batteries or electricity and can provide a barrier and a safe place for your eyes in public awkwardness. On an educational level books normalise correct spelling as well as instil formatting and punctuation skills.

Both mediums are free through local libraries and available for purchase, although obviously books are more wildly sold in retail outlets. Audiobooks on cassette or CD are typically more expensive due to the added expense of recording and the lack of the economy of scale of high ‘print’ runs that are available in the publishing of printed books. However, there are certain economies of scale that favour downloadable audiobooks, which do not carry mass production costs, do not require storage of a large inventory, do not require physical packaging or transportation and even if ‘returned’ do not require a cost of physical return or destruction/disposal. If such economies were passed on to customers, unit profit margins would be reduced but sales volumes would increase. It is not known what affect this would have on book sales in other formats.

About forty percent of all audiobook consumption occurs through public libraries, with the remainder served primarily through retail bookstores. Library download programs are currently experiencing rapid growth (more than 5,000 public libraries offer free downloadable audiobooks).

So, audio is on the rise and may slowly but surely shake its daggy reputation but hardcopy has stood the test of time. Who has won today’s showdown?

Well, that’s up to you.

M.B.

Month: March 2014

busybird_publishing