A couple of months ago, a tweet about this YA memoir, Straightling, caught my attention. Following the link to the author's website, I signed up for her email list and got access to an excerpt. Her fresh, lively voice captivated me immediately. I emailed the author, Cyndy Drew Etler, and asked if I could review her book for M.L.T.S. Magazine.
A little while later, I got an email asking for opinions of two stock photos. And so began a beautiful friendship.
We email almost constantly. We talk about self-publishing, our favorite books and movies, and writing. Cyndy's been reading THEY KEPT THEIR SECRETS, the book I'm working on, and critiquing it. For a criticism junkie like me, her imparting her intelligence and talent is a blessed gift.
Today, she sent me this email:
Here's a sentence that illustrates one of the points I want you to pick up. I know you have the talent to do this, just maybe it hasn't occurred to you concisely.
When you describe things, as much as you are able, and as much as is reasonable, you want to use the perfect descriptor--and quite often, that descriptor is going to be the most effective if it's unexpected. Check this sentence out.
He sat on the lumpy green couch tapping his feet in time with a guitar he scratched at with sullen incompetence.
Lumpy, green, couch: standard fare. Nothing unusual, but at the same time, no overkill, either. It's lumpy and it's green. It's not also velour, scratched-up, old, and heavy. Right? So for the part of the image that is not the pivotal part--that is not the part he most wants you to take notice of--he gives two normal words to describe it. Just enough to let you know it's shitty.
Tapping his feet in time: that's just what the character is doing. Nothing fancy, just a statement of fact. This, too, is not the focus of the sentence.
a guitar he scratched at with sullen incompetence. NOW we're talkin. THIS is the gem in the crown. The incompetence, the animal-like fumbling. Therein lies our characterization, so therein lies our fancy wording. You dig?
And instead of telling us "he couldn't really play, so he was fumbling at the guitar," he let us divine that, by showing ("scratched at") not telling. He did tell about incompetence, but the "sullen" gives us the layers about him. He's pouty. He's not only incompetent, he's pissed about it.
See what I'm saying here? I want you to go through all your stuff and highlight the lines where you are telling, not showing.
Then with a colored pen, underline the portion of those sentences which is the gem, the really important info you want us to get.
Finally, for those underlined parts, I want you to go into like a state of meditation about it. Hard to explain this part, but you have to let your mind loose of its moorings, and see or feel or hear what that thing/scene/action/look/mood is most "like." A wedding dress, dark like Louisiana Bayou. A stadium cheer of a smile. See how they're totally not related, but the layers say soooo much?
This woman is quickly becoming a dear friend. Hopefully her advice will help you sharpen your own writing!
No comments:
Post a Comment