I didn't like yesterday's post. Made me feel like an amateur which I don't think I am.
I'm not taking it down, but I'm not happy with it.
Heard back from the editor I hired and she likes the basic arrangement of NEARLY HUMAN, said that some things could be cut but it otherwise works. She counseled patience...
So I'll wait until she's done.
I tried to completely reorganize and cut the book and it didn't work.
One thing I've noticed over the years is that the first version that a person reads is usually the version they most like. It's as if they become invested in that incarnation. So there's that.
Tomorrow I have to make a choice about what to work on next. I'm torn between working on THE RELUCTANT WIZARD sequel or a DEATH OF AN IMMORTAL sequel. Or going back and seeing what I can do with SOMETIMES A DRAGON.
Linda did a rewrite of DRAGON and I'd like to plug that in and see if it works and as I'm making the digital copy, do some rewriting. I really trust Linda's instincts, and I'm betting she improved it.
I loved S.A.D. back when I wrote it, but much like NEARLY HUMAN, it seemed to have structural problems I couldn't overcome. After 30 years, I might be willing to make the necessary changes.
I used to think that I could just combine different writings into a whole -- so it didn't matter if I wrote from beginning to end in one session.
I'm thinking I was wrong about that. Books that have worked for me lately (and in hindsight in the past) tend to be done as a whole -- books that don't work tend to be drawn out and combined and mixed and reorganized and "improved" and become a mess.
I'm now at the point with NEARLY HUMAN where it has become a jumble of words. So I'll probably just take the editor's suggestions, follow through, and then call it a day.
I'm very curious about SOMETIMES A DRAGON, so maybe I'll start with that. When I tried the same thing with BLOODSTONE, my fourth book, I found it to be completely unfixable -- but I also learned some things. So even if S.A.D. never transforms, I'm sure I'll get something out of it.
I'm not taking it down, but I'm not happy with it.
Heard back from the editor I hired and she likes the basic arrangement of NEARLY HUMAN, said that some things could be cut but it otherwise works. She counseled patience...
So I'll wait until she's done.
I tried to completely reorganize and cut the book and it didn't work.
One thing I've noticed over the years is that the first version that a person reads is usually the version they most like. It's as if they become invested in that incarnation. So there's that.
Tomorrow I have to make a choice about what to work on next. I'm torn between working on THE RELUCTANT WIZARD sequel or a DEATH OF AN IMMORTAL sequel. Or going back and seeing what I can do with SOMETIMES A DRAGON.
Linda did a rewrite of DRAGON and I'd like to plug that in and see if it works and as I'm making the digital copy, do some rewriting. I really trust Linda's instincts, and I'm betting she improved it.
I loved S.A.D. back when I wrote it, but much like NEARLY HUMAN, it seemed to have structural problems I couldn't overcome. After 30 years, I might be willing to make the necessary changes.
I used to think that I could just combine different writings into a whole -- so it didn't matter if I wrote from beginning to end in one session.
I'm thinking I was wrong about that. Books that have worked for me lately (and in hindsight in the past) tend to be done as a whole -- books that don't work tend to be drawn out and combined and mixed and reorganized and "improved" and become a mess.
I'm now at the point with NEARLY HUMAN where it has become a jumble of words. So I'll probably just take the editor's suggestions, follow through, and then call it a day.
I'm very curious about SOMETIMES A DRAGON, so maybe I'll start with that. When I tried the same thing with BLOODSTONE, my fourth book, I found it to be completely unfixable -- but I also learned some things. So even if S.A.D. never transforms, I'm sure I'll get something out of it.