Swop Box Needs Swapping?

My local library has a Swop Box for magazines. Ideally, they want you to bring a magazine to leave for others, and you can take one to read. It’s a great idea for having a quick look at magazines you might not normally buy, and if you come across a magazine that could be a potential market, if the issue is a little out of date (which some of them can be) at least you know it’s worth lashing out and buying the latest copy in the newsagents for proper market analysis purposes. It’s worth spending ten to fifteen minutes going through the box analysing them all for their potential as markets. Have you checked your local library to see if they have such a box? If not, why not suggest it?

But have you noticed the spelling? Swop, as opposed to swap? I was sorely tempted to ask the library if they had a dictionary so that they could check the spelling, but I didn’t … and I’m glad I didn’t! I would never spell swap with an O, but when I got home I opened my trusty Oxford English dictionary and searched for ‘swop’ … and found it. According to the OED ‘swop’ is an accepted variant of ‘swap’. Whilst it identified that ‘swap’ is the traditional version that most people would use, it confirmed that ‘swop’ is an acceptable spelling and not, as I first thought, an incorrect spelling.

Which just goes to illustrate the point that sometimes things are not wrong when we think they are … just different. So, the next time you come across a word that you’re convinced is incorrectly spelt, why not get out the dictionary, just to double check?

Good luck!

Got Any Ideas You Don't Want?

I was catching up on some reading last week. The writer Hunter Davies has a column in Cumbria Life magazine, and in the issue I’d finally got around to reading he was discussing ideas: how some work, some don’t and some just aren’t right for him, but could work for other people. In the article he even mentions some ideas that readers can take for themselves. (Well, there is no copyright in ideas, only in how they are expressed.)

Several of his ideas that he was ‘giving away’ in his column were because they weren’t commercial enough. He’d tried offering them to publishers, but they’d all rejected them on the grounds that they weren’t enough of a money-spinner (for the publishers). Hunter Davies wasn’t saying that they were bad ideas - just not economically-viable ideas. Many of his ideas could work really well as a hobby-project for a writer who isn’t reliant upon selling everything they write to put food on the table.

This got me thinking … I often have ideas (thankfully) but I don’t always see an outlet, or market, for them immediately, so I often put them aside in storage for when the time is right. But it has never crossed my mind that my own writing circumstances might actually prevent me from developing an idea any further. My ideas books could be full of ideas that I’ll never be able to develop, for whatever reason, so is my ideas book the best place to store them? Or perhaps we should share our ideas around a bit more?

Even if we did, other writers would develop our ideas in their own way. Give a writers’ group an idea for an exercise and you never get two writers producing the same content. 

So, next time you have an idea that you can’t use it right away, consider whether you’re the right writer to develop that idea in the first place. If not, then what are you going to do with it? We could start selling them on eBay! Now there’s an idea!

Good luck.

Comedy (And Other) Rules

I’ve just finished reading Comedy Rules: From the Cambridge Footlights to Yes Prime Minister by Jonathan Lynn. Lynn was one half of the partnership (the other being Anthony Jay) who wrote the hugely popular Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister comedy television series, and this book provides 150 rules for writing comedy. But, then again, it doesn’t. Let me explain.

Lynn uses these ‘rules’ to explain some aspects of writing comedy, whilst also drawing upon various moments of his life. It’s part writing handbook and part biography. However, one point Jonathan made was that these rules are not really rules but guidelines. And then, they’re only guidelines that he’s found useful to his writing - they wouldn’t work for everyone. (That doesn’t mean to say that it’s not full of practical advice for writers of comedy!)

In other words, what works for one writer may not work for another. And sometimes, what works for one writer might not always work for that writer. It’s easy for us to think that just because something has always worked for us in the past, it will always work for us in the future. These things then become our own rules that we find ourselves following religiously, which might not always be right.

Sometimes, it’s worth reviewing your own personal writing rules. For the next few weeks I’m going to be breaking one of my own writing rules. As a self-employed writer, I’ve always written for ‘work’ during the day: writing for pleasure is something I’ve only done in the evening. That’s been one of my rules for many years. But, now, I’m going to experiment! I shall spend part of my day writing for pleasure.

Why not consider what your writing rules are? Which rules about writing do you adhere to? Why do you adhere to them? Is there a valid reason for doing this? If not, why not break it for a few weeks? After all, rules are meant to be broken, aren’t they?

Good luck. 

DC Thomson: Me, The Society of Authors, and a DC Thomson Editor.

Firstly, I normally schedule my posts to appear on a Monday morning, but the subject of this post is topical, and rather than delay this until Monday, I felt it better to post it earlier than planned.

Secondly, because of the subject matter of this post, it is much (add about another 20 much-es) longer than my usual posts, so I warn you now … go and get a cup of tea, or coffee, make yourself comfortable, and then take your time to read through this.

Thirdly, I am a writer, not a solicitor, so none of what appears here constitutes legal advice. Got that?

Right. Ready? Here goes … (you did go and get that cup of tea, or coffee, didn’t you?)

There has been a lot of chatter on the Internet, and on Facebook, and other social networking sites, about the new DC Thomson contract. As mentioned in last week’s post, (http://simonwhaleytutor.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/comprehend-contract.html) whenever a writer is faced with a contract, which they don’t understand, always get professional advice. Twenty-four hours after my post went live, the postman delivered my new DC Thomson contract! So, as a member of the Society of Authors I asked them to clarify a few points for me. (I asked them nicely, because this is not a book contract, which is what the Society is used to looking at but, bless them, they obliged.) 

I received their reply on Wednesday, and they raised a few points. My DC Thomson contract was sent to me by the editor Angela Gilchrist at The People’s Friend (I have had both fiction, and non-fiction published by The People’s Friend). Angela’s letter finished by stating that if I had any queries, I was to get in touch. I therefore put those queries the Society of Authors raised to Angela, and she responded less than 24 hours later.

First Rights
Clause 1 of the contract says that DC Thomson want: The exclusive right to first publication in any Media (as defined below), in any language, anywhere in the world in any of the Company’s Products at the Company’s discretion.

At first, I, like many other writers, wondered if DC Thomson were asking for First World Rights (meaning they wanted the right to be the first to publish the content in every country in the world). After re-reading the clause several times (each time slower than the time before, and enunciating every syllable, because, for some reason, doing so seems to improve comprehension), I came to the conclusion that what they are asking for is the right to be the first, anywhere in the world, to publish the material. In other words, once DC Thomson have published the text (thus being the first in the world to publish it), a writer is then free to offer the same text to other publications in other countries. I asked the Society of Authors to clarify this.

The Society of Authors said: After first publication, yes you have the right to reuse the material elsewhere as you please (subject to Clause 8).

(Clause 8 of the contract asks for the right of first refusal to publish a collection of works in book form.)

This means that a writer who has sold DC Thomson a short story, or article, which DC Thomson has subsequently published, is entitled to offer that article or short story to other publications around the world.

To ensure I understood this correctly, I asked Angela Gilchrist the following: (please also note that Angela ran my queries past the DC Thomson legal team, before responding to me)

I said: “The Society of Authors assumed (but have suggested I double-check with you to clarify) that this clause means DC Thomson want to be the first in the world to publish the writer’s work (in any format). Once the work has been published by DC Thomson (in any format), the writer is then free to offer the work elsewhere in the world. 

For example, if The People’s Friend accepts a short story I’ve written, I can’t sell that same short story to any other magazine in any other country, until DC Thomson have published it. Once it has been published, I’m free to offer it elsewhere. Is this correct?”

Angela Gilchrist replied: “Yes, this is correct.”

The Timescale To Publication
I was worried by one element of this … the fact that the clause gave no guarantee that DC Thomson would publish within a set period of time. If a writer can’t sell to other markets until DC Thomson has published the text, then that could cause problems. DC Thomson could simply stockpile material.

It was something I’d asked the Society of Authors, who confirmed the contract stipulates no timescale to publish.

The reason I was worried about this is because I have experience of this with DC Thomson. The People’s Friend accepted a travel feature from me in May 2005, which they did not publish until August 2011 - more than six years later. Clearly, as someone who sells material all over the world, I can’t put a lot of material ‘on hold’ for up to six years.

When I asked Angela Gilchrist about this, she responded as follows:

“We can’t promise to publish within a particular time frame. However, what I can say is that it is highly unlikely that the scenario you outline above would ever occur now. In the four years that I’ve been editor, I’ve drastically cut the amount of editorial stock held by the magazine and promoted much tighter turn-arounds between purchase and publication. With travel features, we are almost always able to tell the author at the time of purchase which issue the article is scheduled to appear in. We’re always happy to answer questions from contributors, so if ever you need to know a publication date and we haven’t supplied you with one, just get in touch and we’ll do our best to help.”

I have only had a ‘six-year’ wait once - other material has been used much more quickly, and so I believe Angela’s comments are genuine. (Indeed, my experience of purchase-to-publication with The Weekly News has been a matter of weeks in practically all cases.)

Practical Implications*
(*This is a bonus section that I decided to add after sleeping on my thoughts overnight.)

This ‘first in the world to publish’ clause does have practical implications on the way a writer might operate. I know there are many writers who (particularly with short stories) submit their work to the highest payer first, and then work their way down the list. And most people are aware that DC Thomson are towards the bottom end of that list.

You could argue that if everyone on that list above DC Thomson has rejected your story, then by the time you approach DC Thomson, their requirement to be the first to publish, isn’t such a big issue. However, it is, because if you’ve also been sending off stories to other countries at the same time, and subsequently sold some rights to your story in another country - which has then been published, then you’re no longer able to submit your story to DC Thomson, because it will break their ‘we want to be the first in the world to publish this’ clause. In this scenario, DC Thomson’s own contract prevents you from offering them your work in the first place.

In some ways, I think this clause has bigger consequences for writers who are not based in the UK. Those writers need to think about this carefully, because if they sign up to the contract and decide to submit a particular piece of work to DC Thomson, this contract forces them to submit that piece to DC Thomson first, before they even submit to magazines in their own countries. Only when DC Thomson has accepted and published their work (or rejected it), can they then begin to offer the work in their home country and other countries around the world. This may be a problem for some writers. For others, it may not.

This also has implications for UK-based writers too. There have been several times when I’ve sent my stories across the world and sold foreign rights before I’ve successfully sold UK rights. If I signed this contract and subsequently sold foreign rights to a story first, then I wouldn’t be able to submit that same story to DC Thomson. 

Whatever you decide to do, what this contract does mean is that it’s becoming increasingly more important that writers maintain accurate, and detailed, records of the rights they’ve sold in their work, and where they’ve sent work to. I have written on this subject, in the past, and you can read the article on the sort of information to record, on the Ezee Writer website: http://www.writersbureau.com/e-zee-writer/november-2012/page3.htm

(Okay, if you’ve got this far, you’re doing well. You might want to get up and stretch your legs at this point, before continuing!)

Selling Work Abroad
The Society of Authors picked up in the contract that Clause 2 might prevent writers from offering First Rights in other countries. First, let’s look at Clause 2:

Clause 2 states: Following the Company’s first use as described in point 1 above, the non-exclusive, transferable right to reuse, republish and retransmit your Contribution in any Media, in any language, anywhere in the world, in any of the DCT Group’s Products and at the DCT Group’s discretion and without further payment to you.

The scenario the Society of Authors envisaged was this: Imagine you sold a short story to DC Thomson, and one of their UK publications published it. According to this contract you are now free to offer your material elsewhere, such as to an Australian publication, for example. Normal procedure would be for the writer to offer the Australian publication First Australian Serial Rights - the right to be the first Australian publication to publish your story. However, if DC Thomson also happened to own an Australian publication, Clause 2 would enable them to ‘reuse’ your short story at no extra payment in the Australian publication. If this were to happen, then a writer could no longer offer First Australian Serial Rights … if the DC Thomson Australian publication had been first to publish the text in Australia. (There are ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ in that sentence - you could still sell First Australian Serial Rights, if DC Thomson didn’t re-use your work in their Australian publication.)

(Don’t explode just yet - bear with me on this one.)

I put this to Angela Gilchrist and asked if my interpretation was correct. (Remember, she ran my queries by the DC Thomson legal team.) Angela said, “This interpretation is correct.”

Right, now just because I have interpreted this correctly, that doesn’t mean that the world is going to end! 

Having looked at the DC Thomson website, at the moment I can only find references to UK-based publications. That doesn’t mean to say that DC Thomson don’t own any foreign publications, but, so far, I haven’t found any. They may well own foreign publications. [There is a page on Wikipedia listing DC Thomson & Co publications, but I leave it up to you as to whether you rely on a Wikipedia webpage as being an authoritative, definitive list ;-) ] 

But the point I want to make is this: If DC Thomson doesn’t own an Australian publication, then Clause 2’s right to reuse your material in any publication, anywhere in the world, won’t take away your First Australian Serial Rights, as I’ve exampled (is that a word?) above. If they don’t own an Australian publication, they can’t be the first to publish your work in Australia, so you can still sell First Australian Serial Rights (after DC Thomson have first published the piece).

That’s how I interpret it. If you think differently, that’s fine. What I would suggest is that if you have any particular First Serial Rights you are keen to retain, it would be worth checking that DC Thomson doesn’t own any publications in that particular country.

Of course, this clause could become problematical to writers if DC Thomson were to go on a spending spree at some point in the future and buy up a whole load of foreign publications. But if anyone knows what’s going to happen in the future, can they please get in touch with me and give me next week’s winning lottery numbers. If DC Thomson does start acquiring foreign publications, that’s when a writer would be advised to think again, and assess their own personal situation, before submitting any further material.

Whilst Angela Gilchrist confirmed my interpretation of Clause 2 was correct, she also had this to say: “But again, feel free to contact us if ever you have a specific query.”

So, if First South African Serial Rights or any other first rights are important to you, then simply drop the editor an email and ask. Better to get the information from the company, than to guess yourself and get it wrong. 

The editors at DC Thomson have a reputation for being some of the most helpful there are in the industry - and Angela Gilchrist took time to answer my (long) email, despite the fact that she’s responsible for putting together a weekly publication. I’ve said before on this blog that, particularly when a magazine goes to print, editors are immensely busy. Well, when you’re putting together a weekly publication, that means you’re going to print on a weekly basis, which means you’re very busy on a weekly basis. Despite this, Angela still took time to deal with my query.

So, if you have a query, ask the editor and be patient for the reply.

Payment
In my email to Angela, I mentioned that Clause 2 discusses the fact that material could be reused without further payment, so did this mean that more will be paid in the future for the first use of our work. (Well, if you don’t ask, you don’t get!)

Angela replied with: “Nice try!” She did mention though, that payments may be reviewed later on in the year. Of course, that doesn’t mean that payments will go up, but at least they are planning to review it. (I’m sure cynics have already made up their mind what the results of any payment review will be, but if they have, that’s their choice.)

Collections
I know there are many writers who were concerned about the new contract and it’s implications for pocket novels and longer serial collections, etc. I’m sorry, but this is not a market I’m involved in, so I have not pursued this, at this time. There are other writers who are investigating the implications of these clauses, so you may be able to find out more information elsewhere. But, if it isn’t, then contact DC Thomson and ask them yourselves! DC Thomson are introducing this new contract, so they are expecting writers to have queries. They’re anticipating writers getting in contact with them. So, don’t disappoint them!

(It’s okay, I’m drawing to a close now)

So, to sum up this blog posting (if that’s possible):

- the new contract states that DC Thomson has to be the first to publish the accepted work (in any media). After that the writer is free to submit it elsewhere. Bear in mind, though, that this has implications for how and when you can submit the same work to others. You may have to change the way your operate, to accommodate this, if you choose to sign the contract.
- if you become aware that DC Thomson owns a foreign publication, then it might be prudent to check whether you’re still free to offer first serial rights to a publication in that same foreign country. (At present I don’t think this is an issue, but as I said, I cannot verify this. At the end of the day, this is the individual writer’s responsibility.)
- if you have any queries, then ask the editor. (Rumour has it they are human, and when they do a Number Two in the Loo they have to wipe their own bottoms, just like the rest of us. Sorry for lowering the tone here, but editors are not some nine-headed beast that will blacklist you forever, simply because you asked a question! Remember to keep this in perspective!) 

I do appreciate that when you have one contract that applies to everything, it means writers will be affected differently. For non-fiction pieces there is more flexibility, because it’s much easier to rewrite an article and turn it into a completely different piece (and the Society of Authors confirmed that the contract does not prevent writers from writing about the same subject matter in other publications). And, non-fiction is not compiled into anthologies or other collections in the same way that fiction is (although this contract does enable DC Thomson to do something similar with articles too!).

Writers are individuals, which means that this contract will affect different writers in different ways. Some writers won’t have a problem with this contract, others will. Just because others don’t have a problem with it, doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t have a problem with it. Likewise, just because others do have a problem with it, doesn’t mean you should too. 

Whether you sign any contract is purely your decision and yours alone. And, ultimately, even then, signing the contract only has implications for you if you submit any material to DC Thomson in the future. This contract does not apply to previously accepted material.

Now that I’ve had professional feedback on the contract, and the editor has clarified some points for me, I now have a much better understanding of what this contract is asking, and, more importantly, how it fits into my writing. I haven’t made my decision yet, but I feel in a better place to make a decision now. I hope this blog post has clarified a few things for other writers too. I am sorry if I have complicated things further for you! I appreciate it won’t have answered every writer’s question … but, to be perfectly blunt, it is not my responsibility (nor that of any other blogger, or writer) to answer every writers’ question on this contract! 

If you receive the contract through the post (and they are being sent out in batches), and you don’t understand its implications for your writing, then you need to take steps to clarify what you don’t understand by asking the right people. Talk to the editors. Talk to professional organisations. That’s what I’ve been doing over the past week.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the Society of Authors for the time they spent going through this contract on my behalf, and I also want to thank Angela Gilchrist for her time in responding to my queries so quickly (despite going to press! So, if The People’s Friend is a little late hitting the shelves next week, it’s probably my fault everyone!). I’d also like to thank the other DC Thomson editors for taking the time and trouble of commenting on other blogs, as they try to clarify things for us.

Congratulations for reaching the end of this post. You probably deserve another cup of tea, or coffee, now!

Good luck! 

PS - to anyone who hasn’t been to my blog before, Good luck is how I end every blog post - the reference to luck is in no way meant to imply that luck is needed with the dealing of this contract :-)

PPS - Now there’s 3,304 words I wasn’t expecting to write today!

PPPS - the next blog post is scheduled for Monday 3rd June. After writing that lot, I need a break :-)

Comprehend the Contract

There’s been a bit of chatter on the Internet about a new contract one magazine publisher appears to be introducing.

The world is changing, and all magazine publishers are having to change with it, and rightly so. Who’d have thought 18 months ago that we could buy copies of some of the oldest women’s weekly magazines on our tablets or smartphones? As a result, these publishers need more than the traditional First British Serial Rights, that they’ve always bought, which is why these changes are being made to contracts. This provides a good opportunity to remind writers they should always check what they are signing.

There’s a growing trend for publications to ask for more and more rights. And in some ways, it is understandable. After all, if they make a publication available to download over the Internet, then it’s available to be downloaded anywhere in the world.

Some publications ask for All Rights. For example, the guidelines for Yours magazine are available for download from their website: http://www.yours.co.uk/Yours-Magazine-News/Search-Results/Yours-Guides/Yours-Submission-Guidelines/ and the fiction guidelines clearly state at the end: All successful submissions are accepted on an All Rights basis that gives Bauer Media exclusive copyright

So, if you submit a short story to Yours magazine and they accept it, you’ve allowed them to have All Rights in your work, thus preventing you from doing anything else with that text.

Some magazines are open to negotiation, however, with publishing businesses consolidating across the world, the flexibility editors once had is being taken away and replaced with standard contracts.

The decision about which rights to sell, or whether to sign a contract, falls down to the individual writer. No-one forces you to sign a contract. It’s your decision whether you sign a contract or not. But when you do, be sure you understand exactly what it is you’re signing. 

If you there’s anything you’re unsure of, seek professional guidance. Members of the Society of Authors can get free advice on book contracts, whilst National Union of Journalists members can get contractual guidance from their organisation. (As a member of the Society of Authors I asked them for feedback on a contract I’d been offered by a magazine that published fiction, which was a bit cheeky because the SoA specialise in book contracts! However, they did look at it for me, and they pointed out that the contract contradicted itself several times and wouldn’t stand up in court!)

Know what the contract allows you to do and, more importantly, what it restricts you from doing. For example, a contract that asks writers to give them the exclusive right to be the first publication to publish the piece anywhere in the world means you can’t offer that work anywhere else, until that publication has published it. That might not seem too restrictive, but I shall always remember the article a publication accepted from me (and paid for) in 2005, yet did they didn’t publish it until 2011. Hanging on for six years before being able to offer material elsewhere might be bearable for the occasional piece of work, but I wouldn’t want to have to cope with it for a lot of my work!

However, if there’s something in the contract you don’t understand then your first port of call should be the editor. They’ll be able to explain things for you … and probably in language that everyone understands! (Which begs the question - why can’t contracts be written in plain English? It would make everyone’s life, so much easier!)

Good luck!  

Weaving A Little Magic

On Saturday I went on a basket-weaving workshop. And whilst busy weaving and thrashing, it struck me how creating a willow basket had many similarities to writing. For example, whatever you create from willow must have a solid structure and frame to weave around, in the first place. Without that, the interesting detail of the weave, or the different willows you can use to add extra colour to your creation, simply get lost. They lose their impact.

As I discovered, it’s good to see in your mind’s eye what it is you want to create, but whilst you’re weaving in the extra detail, it’s extremely easy to lose sight of that structure. When weaving with willow, not only do you have to look at the pattern you’re using for your weave, but you have to continuously amend, adjust and cajole your structure, to ensure that you don’t weave it away. Lose this focus and your finished product ends up looking completely different to what you’d originally planned!

I’m just in the process of outlining a new large project. I’ve always done some planning with large projects, but I tend to outline the basic structure first, before diving in with the actual writing. However, with this latest project I’m doing things slightly differently. I’m planning in more detail. It involves several pads of sticky post-it notes and a large cupboard door! As each thought comes to me, I’m jotting it down on a post-it note and then sticking it on my cupboard door, where I think it needs to go.

As I spend more time thinking about this, and adding additional post-it notes, I’ve seen how easy it is to keep my original structure in place. In fact, it’s made it easier to shift things around a bit, to ensure my planned structure retains its shape. If one post-it note influences the outcome of another, I simply move them to their new position. Once I’ve got all of my lose ends identified and tied up, then I’ll have my finished structure, and I can begin writing. It could be argued that the words we write are the weave that holds our structure in place. Whilst the words might look pretty, without that initial structure holding them all together, their impact won’t be as great.

When you next sit down with a writing project (of any size) consider creating a more detailed structure. Be clear what your finished piece should look like, and then compare your finished piece with your intentions. As you can see from the finished basket here, I think I should have concentrated on the structure of my basket a little more! (At least the planning of my next project is going a little better!)

Good luck!

Writers Abroad Anthology

A short post this week (it is a Bank Holiday Monday, after all). I've been informed that the group, Writers Abroad, are seeking submissions for their next anthology: Far Flung and Foreign.

Details are as follows:

Writers Abroad Anthology: 'Far Flung and Foreign'

Closing date: 31 July 2013. 

Entrants: Only for expat and former expat writers. 

Fiction: 1700 words max. 

Non-fiction: 1000 words max. 

Flash Fiction: 500 words max. 

Poems: 30 lines max. 

Theme: Foreign places. 

Free to enter, all profits from the anthology will be donated to the charity Book Aid International. 

Foreword to be written by novelist, Amanda Hodgkinson.

Full submission guidelines: www.writersabroad.com

If you fit the criteria, then why not enter?

Good luck!

Is That What You REALLY Want To Say?

This week, some of us in the UK have the opportunity to vote in our local council elections. This means that the various political parties have been pushing their campaign material through our letterboxes. This is some of the funniest material about, often conveying information that the political parties probably didn’t intend to convey.

For example, the political party in control of my local council has put out campaign material promoting their achievements whilst they’ve been in office. One such achievement focusses on improving the county’s broadband infrastructure. In one sentence they mention that they “found £8 million.”

Now, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, the main definition of the verb found is: “having been discovered by chance, or unexpectedly.” I wonder if this political party want voters to think they manage money in such a slapdash manner that they have discovered by chance, or unexpectedly, the sum of £8 million. (It suggests that the cleaner came across it one day, fallen down the back of the filing cabinet.)

I have to say that this particular political party did not help their cause when they went on to say that they were going to use this £8 million and put it with the £8.2 million already set aside, to enable them to spend £16.7 million on improving the broadband infrastructure. Now, it’s been a while since I was last at school, and I was never any good at maths, but I’m fairly confident that 8 + 8.2 does not equal 16.7. 

Perhaps, there was another £500,000 that had been earmarked for this project, but this wasn’t mentioned in the campaign material. As a result, this leaflet suggests the political party aren’t in control of the finances, unexpectedly discovering by chance some money, and are completely inept at basic accounting!

So, next time you write something, edit your work and choose your words carefully. Are you conveying the message you really want to convey?

Good luck.

(PS. Unfortunately, the campaign material from the other political parties is just as dire!) 

Competition News

Just a quick note to mention that the Writers Bureau Short Story competition is open for entries. Prizes range from £500 (1st) to £100 (4th) for short stories of up to 2,000 words. The closing date is 30th June, and the entry fee is £5/$8/€6. For full rules and details visit www.wbcompetition.com, or download an entry form at http://www.wbcompetition.com/StoryEntryFormS13.pdf

Also, the writers' group I go to, Wrekin Writers, are accepting short story entries into their Doris Gooderson Short Story competition. Entries should be no longer than 1200 words, and prizes range from £150 (1st) to £40 (3rd). Entry fee is £3 per story. Any profits from the competition this year will go to the Severn Hospice. For more information, visit: https://sites.google.com/site/wrekinwriters/Home/competitions-1/doris-gooderson-2013-competition

Good luck!

The Dual Objective

We know that to get published we need to write something that will be of interest to a specific readership. However, as writers, we also need to satisfy our own needs: to enjoy the process of creating something. 

When we start out as writers, it’s our own enjoyment of the creative process that dominates, which makes it’s easy to forget who we’re writing our words for.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with writing for yourself; that’s why people keep diaries. But to be published, it’s important that you recognise you will not be the only reader of what you are writing.

If you’re struggling with this process, of writing for others, here’s a three step technique to help turn your writing around.

Step 1: Write what you want. Sit down and write. Just enjoy the creative process. Write to please yourself and say what you want to say. Write for yourself, first.

Step 2: Print out a copy of your text (keep a copy of your original draft), and go through it, line by line, asking the following questions: Will my target reader need to know this? Will my target reader want to know this? (Think about who your reader is, having undertaken your market analysis.) Delete anything that does not meet these criteria.

Step 3: Now review your reader’s draft to make sure that it flows and is cohesive. Having deleted some text, you may need to insert some linking phrases and sentences. Then compare the two pieces side-by-side. What difference do you notice?

There may be a lot of commonality between the two pieces, although, hopefully, you’ll find that the emphasis has changed. Your second piece is less-likely to be self-indulgent. It will still be informative, and could still reflect your own personal experiences, depending on your subject matter, but it will be more engaging for the target reader.

If you satisfy the objective of writing for yourself first, you may find being more objective about your text for the reader is then much easier. So enjoy the dual objective of writing, but don’t forget to submit your reader piece, when you’re happy with it!

Good luck. 

Time For An MOT?

I’ve just booked my car in for its annual MOT. It’s a little frustrating having to sort these things out, but, then again, it is also re-assuring to know that my vehicle is roadworthy. It made me wonder whether writers should undergo an annual test, to check their roadworthiness for the written word! (Failing with poor emissions takes on a whole new meaning!)

Sometimes we can get swept along with the latest fads, developments and new markets. After Fifty Shades of Grey was published, suddenly, many more writers were writing erotica. Hilary Mantel’s Booker-winning novels (Wolf Hall, Bring Up The Bodies) are written in the present tense, encouraging other writers to try writing in this tense. (It’s more difficult than it first appears!) Whilst following these trends exposes us to different styles of writing, which is a good thing, we should never forget the basics. Our writing should always be roadworthy. The car with the latest all-singing, all-dancing, built-in SatNav, still needs good tyres, good brakes, a steering wheel that turns and working indicator lights to get the occupant to their desired destination safely.

So, what should a Writing MOT test for? 

• A basic understanding of grammar? Whilst it can be acceptable to break the rules (as long as you understand what the rules are and what you are achieving by breaking them), it’s important that you know why the words are in the order they are. 
• What about accepting that it’s okay to look things up in a dictionary? My computer’s operating system has a built-in dictionary (The Oxford Dictionary of English), which means its information is a few clicks away. I’ve never used a dictionary as much as I do now. I question my word choices, and any hint of doubt has me heading for the dictionary. After all, word selection is vital for expressing our thoughts clearly.
• And what about understanding the building blocks of engaging writing? It doesn’t matter whether you write fiction, non-fiction, poetry, or plays, our pieces need structure (scenes), and devices to draw in the reader (dialogue, observations, and plot).

The good news is, just like a car’s MOT, if we fail we simply make repairs to make ourselves roadworthy again. We can remind ourselves of the basics. Many writers have a shelf (if not more) of books on writing. Why not dust one off, that you haven’t read for a while, and re-read it? Remind yourself of the basics. Perhaps we should make it an annual effort: re-reading a how-to guide once a year. I know I benefit from doing so.

Good luck.

Read On. Go on. I Insist!

Firstly, I will admit that this is a pet hate of mine, but the fact that it only occasionally puts in an appearance in magazines suggests that editors might not like it either. What am I talking about? Read on to find out more ...

Ah! I see you've done exactly what I told you to do. Thank you. And that's my point. I told you to read on. As a reader, I don't like being told what to do. If the writer has written an engaging and intriguing introduction they will have my attention and I will want to read on, because I want to know what else the writer has to say.

Telling a reader to 'read on' is lazy writing. If a writer hasn't written an engaging opening then they should rewrite it to make it more engaging. You don't sit down to watch a film, only to have the film's director appear on the screen after a couple of minutes and say, "Stay seated ... there's a really good bit coming up in a minute," do you?

There's a fine line between telling a reader to read on and inviting them to read on, however, I don't even think readers need an invitation. Just cut straight to the point you want to make.

Telling readers what to do is also unnecessary wordage. Instructions to your readers uses word space that could be used to give them more practical, and interesting, information, which would encourage them to want to read on.

So, the next time you find yourself telling your reader what to do put yourself in their shoes and consider how you would feel being told what to do. As a minimum, you should delete your instruction to the reader. Immediately, you'll find the tone of your piece has changed for the better.

Good luck.

Make The Most Of The Mundane

Firstly, this is not an April Fool! (And I can’t believe we’re now in the fourth month of the year, already. Pity the weather seems to have forgotten which month it is too.) But that’s the point. Here in the UK the weather is being … unusual. It’s been a tad chilly. There’s still snow lying on the ground even now. And everybody is talking about it (if not moaning about it).

Although some people don’t like the weather, and wish it were warmer, it is making life more different. Some might say more interesting. It’s giving people something to talk about. 

There may be moments when writers feel that in order to write they need to write about something interesting. Perhaps they need to sail down the Amazon wearing a fur coat and red ankle socks, or conquer Everest on their hands, or have driven from Land’s End to John O’Groats in sportscar with a famous celebrity. 

If you fancy doing something different, try writing about a mundane activity, instead.  Sit down and write about making a cash withdrawal (and I mean an authorised one from a cash point machine, rather than an illegal one involving stockings and a sawn-off shotgun!). Alternatively, why not write about making a cup of tea, or pegging out the laundry?

Just because something is ordinary, and mundane, it is perceived as uninteresting. Yet that perception can be wrong. As someone who used to work for a bank, I know everything that can go wrong with a cash point transaction! So, if ever you find yourself stuck for something to write, or you need a writing exercise to stimulate your creative muscle, spend ten minutes writing about a boring, mundane activity. You might just surprise yourself how interesting your subject matter is.

Good luck.

How Far Have You Come?

I had an email from one of my students over the weekend. He was pleased because he'd noticed that one particular magazine had a new editor, so he'd submitted an article (that a previous editor of the same publication had rejected) and was delighted when the new editor had accepted it.

This made him realise that it might be worth going back and resubmitting some of his other articles that the previous editor had rejected. (Definitely a good move, in my opinion.)

However, as he read through some of his older work, he suddenly realised how his writing style had changed. Some of those early sentences were clunky, difficult to read and poorly punctuated. Admittedly, some pieces were now almost five years old, but he set about rewriting and updating them.

It wasn't until he came to re-read his edited version that he realised how far on his writing journey he'd travelled. Suddenly, the words he had in front of him illustrated how much he had learned from the craft of writing over the past five years.

A craftsman is always learning, honing and improving their skills, which is exactly what a writer should be doing. I always feel as though I'm on a never-ending journey, where, hopefully, each new piece is better than the one before.

So go on - why not have a look yourself? Go and find a piece of writing from a time when you had just begun your writing journey. It doesn't matter whether it was a year ago, or ten years ago. Try and find an old piece from those early days and read through it. And if you find yourself cringing, don't be embarrassed. Instead, take comfort from the fact that this proves you've developed as a writer. Isn't that something to be proud of? (And perhaps you can rewrite it and find a new market for that piece today!)

Good luck.

Warning Signs

It doesn’t matter where you are in the world, we are subjected to warning signs: road junction ahead, low bridge, deep water, or, as in my photo here, look out for low-flying gliders. (In case you’re wondering, the footpath cuts across the approach to a local airstrip that gliders use, and, remember, gliders don’t have engines, so they tend not to make any noise.)

In the world of writing, we tend not to have huge metal warning signs, triangular in shape and with red borders. However, there are some signs budding writers should look out for:

• Excitement at finishing the first draft of something: don’t be tempted to submit your work now. The excitement of completion is blocking your clear vision. Put your work aside for a day or so, and then look at it again when your excitement has subsided. You will be grateful for heeding this warning, because the mistakes you failed to see then will now become apparent.
• Thinking it doesn’t apply to you: if you’ve gone to the effort of analysing your target market, then apply what you discovered. If every article is 900 words, why is your piece 1,000 words? Heed the warning and cut the 10%. It’ll be easier than you think. If you spot that the magazine doesn’t use unsolicited manuscripts, don’t send your complete article. Heed the warning and write a query letter/email.
• Complain that an editor has changed your words: whenever your work is published, take the time to sit down and read your published piece. Compare it to the version of the text you submitted to the editor. Has anything changed? Editors sometimes change opening paragraphs, rewrite sections, change spellings, or with fiction they have been known to change character names and even the ending of a story. Don’t pick up the phone, or open up a new email message, and give the editor a rollicking. Accept the warning sign: that your work needed a little adjustment. See what you can learn from it. If they changed the opening paragraph, what have they done? Does it engage the reader more quickly? Does it clarify more succinctly what your article is about? If they’ve changed a character’s name in your story, can you see why they’ve done that? Is the character’s name more reflective of their age, or the age of the readership? Have they produced a better ending to your story? There are many reasons why your text may be changed, but if you read the warning signs, perhaps they indicate a weakness in your writing. Scrutinise the exact changes. What can you learn from them? It could result in more sales in the long run.

There are many warning signs writers should look out for, although they’re not always obvious. Heed the ones you spot and your writing journey should be a little safer.

Good luck.

There Were These Writers In A Pub...

… and we were waiting for our food to be served … food that had been ordered over an hour previously (and we only had an hour left before I was being the hard taskmaster again).

The waiter was clearly experienced in dealing with waiting, hungry customers, when we questioned him.

“If anyone has a shotgun,” he said, “please feel free to shoot the chef, although you’ll have to form an orderly queue and take your turn after me.”

It was a clever response. Not only did it deflect the impatience amongst the group, but it gave a group of writers a wealth of murderous ideas!

And did those ideas flow! But, no-one was jotting anything down. Who knows how many have been forgotten. Perhaps some, like me, made a mental note to remember the ones that we particularly liked, but no-one can remember everything. Many of us had left our notebooks in our workshop rooms (we were obviously hungry).

Thankfully, we decided not to shoot the chef … and about ten minutes later our lunch arrived (and very nice it was too). But whilst the chef escaped with his life, I don’t doubt several ideas also escaped from the clutches of these writers.

No matter how small or insignificant an idea might seem, always have means to jot it down. Who knows where that spark could take you?

Good luck.

The World Turns

I had an email from a student last week whose determination proved to be a good example of how the world turns. Over the last few years he’s had immense success with one of the filler slots in a particular woman’s weekly magazine. Then, all of a sudden, he seemed to fall out of favour, and none of his submissions were used.

This can be immensely frustrating, particularly after several years of successful writing and selling. The reason for this isn’t always obvious. Occasionally, editors like to refresh the magazine and one way of doing this is by bringing in new writers, yet that probably didn’t apply here, because the filler slot the student was targeting was really aimed at readers.

It could be that the editor became a little concerned that this particular student’s name was regularly appearing in the reader slot most weeks. Who knows? But this didn’t stop my student from continuing to submit material. And guess what? After over a year of no success, suddenly, he’s in favour again! The editor is using his work, so much so that sometimes two or three pieces are used in the same issue in this same slot.

Perhaps there has been a change in editor. Perhaps the new editor accepts that my student can offer exactly what they’re looking for in this slot. A change in editor might explain the sudden use of my student’s work again. Alternatively, perhaps this section has now been given to another member of staff to sort out, and this person doesn't have the time to devote to the slot and so is grateful of the submissions for an easier life. Whatever the reason is, it’s a good example of how determination can win through. The world continues to turn, people come and people go, so where perhaps one door closed, over time you might find it re-opening.

So why not think about some markets that you used to submit to, but no longer do? Buy an up-to-date copy and see what’s changed. You never know, you might like what you see, and the editor, or staff, may have changed too. New staff could mean a new opportunity.

Good luck.

A Rejection Can Become An Acceptance

There’s an excellent article in the latest issue of Writers’ Forum magazine (Issue 137) by Glynis Scrivens called Turning A No Into A Yes. In it, Glynis reveals how other writers have turned a rejection into an acceptance.

What I liked about the article, is that it demonstrates quite clearly how all of these other writers accept that rejection is part of the job. But these writers also demonstrated their job-like attitude to rejection and offered some ideas on how to turn the rejection into something more positive.

I say this, because over the weekend I was marking an assignment, and the student had said that he’d already submitted his article, and it had been rejected. He therefore knew I was going to say the article wasn’t very good, it was a bad idea, and was therefore he was wasting my time, but because he’d initially written it for his assignment, he thought he’d send it in anyway. 

Firstly, I was a little surprised that the student had submitted it before sending in his assignment. Timing wasn’t an issue, so why not let your tutor give you some feedback before you send out your work into the big wide world? Anyway, reading through his article, I could see how with a couple of small adjustments, he had a perfectly good piece here. His target market wasn’t quite right in my opinion (which is probably why his article had been rejected), but I suggested another market where it could work, and suggested ways in which he could tweak his idea to fit that new market.

This student was letting the first rejection be the end of the matter, and this needn’t be the case. The examples other writers gave in Glynis’s article offered some great ideas. One common theme struck me though - determination. None of these writers had given up at the first hurdle. One writer, Lynne Hackles, mentioned that the longest it took to sell a story was 30 years.

So, never let a rejection put you off. Yes, it can be disheartening, but it’s not the end of the world. There’s always something else you can do with your idea, or text. It might be a "No" now, but there could be a "Yes" just around the corner ... but only if you do something with that rejected text.

Good luck.

Limiting Your Creativity

A student mentioned in an email to me last week that they were having problems coming up with ideas. He would sit down at his allotted writing time, switch on his laptop and fire up a blank page in his word processor. And then he would think, “Now, what am I going to write about?” Whereupon, he says, he would sit and wonder for up to half an hour about what to write.

Being able to write about absolutely anything can be overwhelming. With so much available to you, it can overload the brain. The trick is to limit your creativity. Paradoxically, limiting your creativity can lead to better creativity.

Instead of thinking I have 30 minutes in which I can write about anything I want, you could try giving yourself some boundaries. Instead, try thinking I have 30 minutes in which I can write anything I want about my home town/my last travels/the date I had last night. As soon as you narrow your choice, your brain has something to work on. It can cope better, because you’ve dismissed everything else.

The problem with having complete freedom is that it stifles you. You might have an idea, but then think, No! I can write about anything I like - I might have an even better idea in a minute. And so your brain continues to consider absolutely everything humanly possible. Whereas, once you’ve narrowed down your topic, your brain has disregarded everything else. You’ve already made the decision not to worry about anything else. Limiting your creativity gives you the freedom to explore a narrow idea.

If you ever go to a writing workshop, rarely will you be asked to sit down and write about absolutely anything that you like. Instead, the workshop facilitator will give you some boundaries from which to work. Sometimes, the more restrictive you are, the more creative you might be.

Some of the world’s greatest inventions have come about through the creative use of limited resources. So, next time you feel creatively stuck try narrowing down your options. You might surprise yourself.

Good luck.

You Don't Have to Agree With Your Tutor ...

I was contacted by a fellow correspondence course tutor this week (he works for another company) who was quite upset about a response he’d had from one of his students. This student had received the tutor’s feedback on their assignment and had taken offence. As a result, the tutor was worried that his criticism had come across as too harsh and was not constructive.

Receiving criticism is difficult, and all tutors are aware of this. But, hopefully, the criticism a tutor gives is constructive. It should demonstrate the steps that can be taken to improve the text, and then explain why those steps lead to better text.

Does a student have to agree with a tutor’s advice and implement it? No, not at all. It is entirely up to the student whether they take the action the tutor has recommended. Most tutors, though, are drawing upon their own (successful) writing experience.

One of the student’s complaints to my fellow tutor, was that he’d picked up on all of the spelling, punctation and grammatical errors, within the text. Surely, this wasn’t necessary when so many published books have poor spelling, grammar and punctuation within them. Sadly, I can see where this attitude comes from - only this morning, whilst reading a crime novel written by a well-known novelist, (and published by one of the big four UK publishers) I came across two spelling mistakes in the text. The first one was a little dismaying, but the second one, only a few pages later, was more annoying. I began to question how many more I might come across in the book, which I expected to be professionally written and produced. But this experience doesn’t make me think it’s okay to let my standards drop. I still want to write to the best of my ability, and to the highest standard that I can attain. And that’s also what I hope for my students, too.

It came across that the student’s response was one of someone whose immediate reaction had taken the comments personally. They’d not liked what they’d read and sat down and fired off an emotional response. Whilst understandable, it’s a shame, because that tutor/student relationship is now more delicate than it might have been. In the future, my friend is more likely to exercise extreme caution when marking this student’s work, (in fear of receiving further vitriolic responses), which means the student may not get the detailed feedback that could really help them. It would probably be better if the student asked to move to a new tutor, and created a fresh tutor/student relationship. Indeed, I’ve often said to people undertaking courses, that if they don’t get on with their tutor, then ask to be transferred. The tutor/student relationship is an important one, but it is also a human relationship, and not all humans get on with one another. You’re more likely to get the most benefit from your course if you have a good relationship with your tutor.

That doesn’t mean that a student has to accept everything their tutor tells them. Sometimes, students have disagreed with my advice. They’ve taken on board my comments and spent time making the changes I’ve suggested, but then they don’t like this new result. That’s okay. I respect the student’s decision, because at least they’ve had a go at making the changes I’ve suggested. They didn’t simply dismiss my suggestions; they gave them thought, consideration and then tried acting upon them. Because of this, they now have a ‘before’ and ‘after’ piece of work, to compare, which they didn’t have before they’d received my feedback. This enables them to examine the differences and ask themselves which bits work better, and why. Being able to say that, “this works better because…” means the student has still learned something in the process, and as a result, they will be a better writer. 

At the end of the day, everybody is human: students and tutors.

Good luck.

Writing: A User Manual

I’ve just finished reading Writing: A User Manual by David Hewson. Unlike many other writing books, Hewson doesn’t say, “These are the rules to writing,” instead he says, “This is how I do it.” If you’ve ever considered writing a novel, then I’d certainly recommend reading it.

There are, naturally, many lessons that all writers can take from this book, whether they write novels or not. In it, he makes an interesting point about how writers work, as creative artists. There are many who bash out the first draft of a piece of text, and then go back later and edit. There are some who agonise over every word and won’t move on until it is right. Whichever way you do it, it doesn’t matter - as long as it’s a system that works for you.

Hewson suggests that some writers should think more about their writing techniques. He draws upon the methods of other creative people. A painter, for instance, doesn’t slap on a whole load of paint, and then hone their piece by deleting the paint that isn’t necessary. Whereas a writer might bash out 120,000 words, and then delete 40,000 words, a painter might sketch an outline and consider carefully, the colours required and where each stroke will go. A painter’s creativity is, generally, something that evolves, step-by-step.

Whereas a sculptor will take a huge block of stone and start deleting it, chipping away to reveal their creation. What’s left is a fraction of what there was at the start, but it has been turned into something beautiful. He raises an important point: creativity is a process. The creative element of writing is not the bashing out of the first draft. The editing process is just as much, if not more, of the creativity system. 

Does how you write matter? Only if it doesn’t work, argues Hewson. He looks at a few common rules offered to writers and gives his take on them. (See his section I Like Adverbs - There, I’ve Said It, Boldly.) And he demonstrates how less is more. The section on the choices he makes for his settings is quite revealing. And there are some lovely anecdotes about co-incidences in this writing world.

So, whatever your next project is, take time to enjoy the creative process.

Good luck.

Writing: A User Manual by David Hewson.
ISBN: 978-1408157428
£12.99
Available from Amazon and other bookstores.