Query #1 June 2014

querylara

Below is the first public query critique I’m offering up on the blog. This will happen once a month (as long as I get a response). I choose one query at random per month. If your query is not selected the first month, it will be in the drawing for the next month. Please do not resubmit unless you’ve made significant edits. To enter, see the rules here. If you want a guaranteed critique (plus line edit) of your query or synopsis, private ones cost $35 each.

Dear [agent],

I am submitting my contemporary young adult novel BOOK TITLE for your consideration because of your desire for international stories that deal with teen’s prevalent issues.  Focusing on bullying and ethnic hate crimes, BOOK TITLE is a simultaneous submission complete at 78,000 words.

Young Adult is an age category, not a genre. I’d prefer having the “this is why I chose you” paragraph at the bottom, but I don’t think it’s a deal-breaker for anyone. Unless an agent specifically tells you to mention if you’re simultaneously submitting, leave it out. Agents expect you to query widely. If another agent requests your full or partial manuscript, then you can mention something.

As for making each first mention of a character’s name in all-caps, I know Writer’s Digest suggests it, but it’s borrowed from screenwriting. Pros: It shows the agent at first glance how many characters you’re mentioning. Cons: It shows the agent how many characters you’re mentioning. You mention Petr once but never again. Unless they are the protagonist(s) or antagonist, don’t mention their names in the query.

For TESS, a Russian student alienated from her school’s state championship bound basketball team in suburban Ohio, forgiveness is a foreign word.  Tess’ crush on upperclassman ELLIOT, a hot upperclassman basketball player, is naïve and misguided.  Elliot struggles with his own feelings for Tess’ gay friend PETR, which complicates the strained tensions between the Russians and the basketball team.  Tess is torn between trusting Elliot—who is pressured by his friends to participate in a hate crime against the Russian Orthodox Church—or her fellow Russians who plant a bomb at the brand new basketball gymnasium in retaliation.  Forgiveness is the only way to survive the hate of high school.  Someone will die if Tess learns the lesson too late.

A breath unit is the number of syllables between two breaths. (Hint: we take breaths at punctuation marks, including parentheses.) A nice average is 8 to 15 syllables. More than 22 without a break isn’t just difficult to read aloud, it’s difficult to read, period.

That first sentence is insanely long. From “a Russian” to “Ohio,” you’ve got one breath unit that’s 30 syllables long. Twenty syllables is pushing it. Thirty, and you’ll turn a reader blue in the face. Read aloud, divide up these sentences. What’s really important? What does the reader HAVE to know? How is forgiveness a foreign word to her? The only question an agent should have from reading your query is “What happens next? I must know!” Never “But why…”

Why is her crush naive and misguided? Are there more Russians than Tess and Petr? Is there a large population of Russians in Ohio? Is she a first-generation immigrant, or is she Russian-American? Why / how could she trust Elliot if her crush on him is misguided? The “Tess is torn” sentence is also a doozy. At this point I fear the manuscript will have longwinded sentences, too.

“Someone will die if Tess learns the lesson too late.” Wait, what? THAT’s what I want to know about. 

What does Tess really want, deep down, and why should we like her? What external things get in the way of her deepest need (my guess would be, in this case, violent bombings), and what internal conflict does she have?

I am a 32 year-old avid reader, student, wife, and mom. Save personal info for the phone call from the editor, or for interviews. Query letters aren’t the place.  My poem [title redacted] won the 2014 [contest, redacted].  This spring, I will continue my education with a MFA an MFA in Writing for Children and Young Adults.

An MFA in writing says you’re serious about the craft. Since you WON the writing contest, you can include that even if it doesn’t relate to this manuscript. If this manuscript was a finalist in a contest, you could include that. But if something wholly unrelated to this manuscript got third place, I wouldn’t include it. If you won obscure awards or were published in collegiate literary magazines that no one else has ever heard of (cough, cough—me), I’d leave that out. I’d focus on more remarkable things about your character. 

Inspired by THE OUTSIDERS, BOOK TITLE depicts the fine line between love, hate, and self-loathing that is also prevalent in LOOKING FOR ALASKA by John Green and Sara Zarr’s STORY OF A GIRL.   The topics of violence, hate, and strained ethnic tensions are timely considering the impending threat in Ukraine and the recent discovery of pressure cooker bombs in a teen’s storage unit in Minnesota.

Don’t mention the timeliness of your book. By the time it finally sees shelves (~2 years), it won’t be timely for those reasons anymore. I’m not a huge fan of comp titles, but if your manuscript is really a good mixture of those, then you can leave it in. What I really want to see is the “love, hate, and self-loathing” IN the text of your query, though. And by that, I mean I want it to be evident that those are themes of your book without you stating them. Show, don’t tell.

Below is the first chapter of FORGIVENESS.  May I send the completed manuscript?

I don’t mind the “may I send” part because it sounds cordial to me, but I’m not sure how a New Yorker would feel about it. “Thank you for your consideration” is the standard way to finish. If they want a full or partial, they’ll request it.

Sincerely,

[redacted]

I want to know what Tess is doing, what changes, why she does what she does, what’s at stake, and what’s getting in her way. I just wrote a post about Characters, Obstacles, and Goals. Read it, revise, resubmit, and I’ll take another look at it.

And do let me (and the other readers) know if you get requests for partials or fulls so we can rejoice with you!

Readers, please share any additional feedback you have, but note that comments are moderated, and if you don’t have anything constructive to say, or if you’re playing the troll, your comment will be deleted.

New Giveaway—Query Workshops

querylara

EXTENDED THROUGH JUNE 15th!

Hopefully by now you know to follow me on Twitter for editing giveaways. If not, follow me @larathelark!

Inspired by the brave writers who participated in #QueryKombat and the Query Shark herself Janet Reid, I’ve decided to start giving away monthly Query Critiques on my blog. To enter for June 2014, email your query to query lara at icloud dot com. Do not send it as an attachment. Post it into the email directly. Subject line: June 2014 Query Submission.

By emailing me your query with the subject “June 2014 Query Submission,” you agree that your query may be posted and critiqued, publicly, on my blog and be included in the archives as long as the blog shall live. Your MS title will be included in the public critique, but your name and contact information will be redacted.

I’m accepting queries without restriction through midnight June 15th, 2014. I’ll open up July queries after I post the first critique and more detailed instructions for following months.

If your query is not chosen for June, yours will be added automatically in the July pile. They will be chosen at random. Do not resubmit unless you have edited your query. As the months progress, more queries will be added to the pile, so you’ll have better chances earlier than if you wait. I’m not an agent, I’m a freelance editor, so I accept queries for manuscripts that aren’t finished.

Don’t want your query publicly critiqued? For $35 I’ll personally, privately critique your query letter. Email me your query (again, not as an attachment) with the subject line “$35 Query Critique.” I’ll email you with information on sending me payment, and then I’ll edit once I receive said payment.

I look forward to getting your queries!

LW

Fifteen Blinks #1—Diction

15 blinks banner

New to Fifteen Blinks? Find out more information here.

Diction

In the Introduction to Fifteen Blinks, I mentioned that people blink less frequently when they are interested. The difference between engaging writing and dull writing is diction—voice—how the words sound in your head and out loud.

Let’s get all multimedia up here and use video to illustrate. Compare the following two videos. Take a mental note of the types of words each speaker is using.

From Ferris Bueller’s Day Off:

and from Dead Poets Society:

The first video is filled with academic, Latinate language, with a pop or two of some Anglo-Saxon. (Read more about the difference between Latinate and Anglo-Saxon diction here.)

alleviate, tariff, revenue, federal government, sank, depression, revenue, voodoo

The second video has some clichés, Latinate language, Anglo-Saxon language, slang, and even onomatopoeia.

Seize the day, DING, food for worms, breathing, cold, die, peruse, haircuts, hormones, invincible, world is their oyster, full of hope, one iota, gonna, fertilizing daffodils, legacy, extraordinary

Which diction is more interesting?

Clichés

“Avoid clichés like the plague.” Clichés are like shorthand for writers. Sometimes it makes sense to use them, because the reader will except the metaphor as an idiom. A cliché is better than “new” imagery that makes the reader question your better judgment or sanity.* My husband’s family has a motto: “Work smarter, not harder.” Sometimes using a cliché is being smart; other times it’s lazy writing. If one of your characters is a bit dull, then let him speak in a cliché once or twice. Outside of dialogue, use sparingly.

*Read about the Bad Sex writing award over at The Guardian for a laugh and cautionary tale (NSFW)

Overdoing Diction

Perhaps you’ve heard of the phrase “purple language” or “flowery language” before. When every other word was looked up in the thesaurus, it’s obvious that you are trying to impress the reader, and we are pretty sure that you are just overcompensating. See my references to Christopher Paolini’s debut here.

Diction is often overdone in sentimental fiction. It’s also overdone in classrooms. I was hoping for some good examples of bad imagery when I saw a Google result titled “How Not to Suck at Writing—Imagery.” Instead, I got some bad examples of “good” imagery. The examples of “good” imagery in that post come across as a Mad-Libs gone terribly, terribly wrong. If you take a writing class and the teacher praises this kind of writing, ask for your money back and buy a copy of Stephen King’s On Writing. Money better spent.

But read King with a grain of salt if you do happen to pick up On Writing. He says things like this:

“Any word you have to hunt for in a thesaurus is the wrong word. There are no exceptions to this rule.”

…Apparently a drunk and high Mr. King is of a more sober mind than I, bearer and rearer of children, because I forget words all the time, and thesauruses are a great aid in digging up vocabulary which is half-buried in toddler talk and animal noises. Unless my husband is around. Then I forgo the thesaurus, speaking utter nonsense to him until I remember the word I was trying to think of. It’s usually accompanied by grandiose hand gestures:

“What’s that word for when… You know how… When you feel like… I think it starts with a P…”

Forgetting about Diction

If you don’t pay a whole lot of attention to diction, if you don’t worry about being fancy, your writing will probably come across as conversational, sort of like this blog. Your writing isn’t going to be very exciting—it’s going to be invisible. Everybody can write conversationally of they write the way they speak.

That’s why overdoing it is usually the problem with new (and some seasoned) writers. They want to stand out. Problem is, people notice them standing out for all the wrong reasons and they praise them for it. I see many writers try to get away with purple language by submitting their work as “literary,” when their work isn’t literary at all—it just hasn’t been edited for diction.

Getting diction right

The great news is that getting diction right is incredibly simple. You ready for it?

Read out loud.

Controversial, right? Imagine actually reading your written text out loud! Why, someone might hear you! You might hear yourself!

If you start shaking uncontrollably at the thought of reading aloud, even to an audience of one, then you can download a text-reader that will read your text out for you. And it’s a computer, so you don’t even have to share your work with another human being. Because, you know, that would be terrible, getting someone else’s opinion.

Eh, sorry for the snark. Some people really love text-to-speech and use it. I’m the cheapest person alive, so I choose the free version—my own vocal chords. If someone here uses text-to-speech software, please share your recommendations!

Read my guest post on Better Novel Project: 7 TIPS FOR WRITING REALISTIC DIALOGUE

Diction Exercises

When writing something short—a poem, flash fiction, or memoir vignette—every word needs to count. Diction is so important, I’m giving you a pretty lengthy exercise this time, so you can see good diction for yourself. Optional writing prompt at the end.

Instructions:

  1. Dig out, look up, or take a short story/poem/speech that you absolutely love and think is well written. Hit for between 300 and 800 words, or 3-5 minutes speaking time.
  2. You’ll read it or listen to it at least three times, listing nouns, adjectives, verbs, and phrases from the text.
  3. The first time, make a note of words or phrases that are fresh or poignant.
  4. The second time, make note of diction that is overdone (too flowery) or obnoxious (this includes clichés). It’s okay to move things from the first list into this list.
  5. The third time, take a note of the remaining nouns, adjectives, and verbs, dividing them by their parts of speech.
  6. Take a look at that third list (from step #5). Which words fall into that category because they are “boring”? Which ones are there because they are subtle, rather than overdone?
  7. Now look at the second list (from step #4). Take the list of overdone or flowery language and rewrite them to make them simpler (or more Anglo-Saxon).
  8. Then rewrite the clichés to make them more original. Don’t have a list of clichés? Then you picked your text wisely! Go find 5–10 clichés and rewrite them.
  9. As for that first list? You have two choices. Admire it from afar and never think of it again, or choose one word or phrase as a writing prompt and write a Fifteen-Blinker on it.

The next time you come across something particularly horrible, repeat this exercise (1-9) with that unfortunate work, and rewrite it to make it better.

Remember, you don’t become a better writer by criticizing other writers. You become a better writer by reading and rewriting, rewriting, rewriting, rewriting.

Click any Fifteen Links button to be taken to the most recent Fifteen Blinks post.