Forum: Author Hangout

If you had said "I spent my time at the dance, dancing, drinking, singing and talking" it would imply you did those things during the course of the dance but not necessarily simultaneously.

Not according to her (which is why I'm asking about it here).

As for the 3rd person omni, I assumed it was obvious from the story which story form I was using. But maybe it wasn't as obvious as I believed it was.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with these paragraphs. In fact, I would describe them as a example of excellent writing. I guess that's why I prefer to stick to the First Person--Past POV when I write.

Thanks, Aubie, I appreciate that. However, that's precisely why I write in 3rd person omni, so I can head-hop. I started writing my first story in 3rd person, and felt myself stymied by its limitations. I've never looked back. One of these days I need to try writing a present tense story, but my omni narrator demands I write from a point in the indefinite future. :)

I'll defer to you because you seem to understand POV better than anybody else I know, but I was left with the impression that she meant that he had parts of his manuscript written in either third limited (or third multiple) but had sections written in omni.

Chris. Nope. The entire thing was written in 3rd Omni past. I might include an occasional though (with single quotes to establish it's a though), but those are rare, as it generally doesn't add much to the plot.

The end result, between her chopping my writing style and these pieces of bad advice, I'm seriously questioning her qualifications! However, I still insist, her version of my story was a smoother read (probably because she included so little of my story in it!).

smoother read is not necessarily the same as a better read.

I've been wrestling with the difference between my SOL fans (who prefer longer, more detailed stories) and the "book buying public", who lead busy lives and can't be bothered wasting time with overly long books. I've learned how to trim my writing style, but wanted to know how to trim my books during the editing process (something I'm still not very good at).

Nope. The entire thing was written in 3rd Omni past. I might include an occasional though (with single quotes to establish it's a though), but those are rare,

Those are head-hopping in omni.

What I've learned is that many authors and editors, especially at the traditional publishers, assume a 3rd-person story is limited. So they don't recognize omni and assume it's head-hopping even when the omni is done correctly.

Those are head-hopping in omni.

What I've learned is that many authors and editors, especially at the traditional publishers, assume a 3rd-person story is limited. So they don't recognize omni and assume it's head-hopping even when the omni is done correctly.

Ah, that explains what my editor was thinking. She was projecting her own POV onto my story. As for my including thoughts in 3rd Omni, I use them for clever quips the character doesn't want to speak aloud, but I use it rarely, since I know it's wrong (but sometimes I can't resist a good line, just like the useless quips in a James Bond movie).

However, my editor wasn't referring to any internal quotes (at least as far as I've gotten so far). She was complaining that I was head-hopping by describing a character's motivations in the narrative in a 3rd person omni story (unlimited).

The entire thing was written in 3rd Omni past. I might include an occasional though (with single quotes to establish it's a though), but those are rare, as it generally doesn't add much to the plot.

Why would you do that? Why wouldn't you just let the omni narrator tell what the character is thinking?

However, I still insist, her version of my story was a smoother read (probably because she included so little of my story in it!).

It is a smoother read and her version IS written with a more modern style. However, her version IS missing a distinctive personality, which is still required with the more modern style. The problem is that you cannot achieve a distinctive voice by subtracting a majority from an original voice.

I highly recommend that you consider (if you insist on using her version) revising a persona back into the manuscript. As it stands, she took that away from your work when she made all of the cuts.

There is nothing wrong with that passage if written in omni.

I'll defer to you because you seem to understand POV better than anybody else I know, but I was left with the impression that she meant that he had parts of his manuscript written in either third limited (or third multiple) but had sections written in omni.

I can't think of any trad books published where the POV drifted back and forth from those POV's. So, I'm asking--is there ever a time when you can (Other than writing a prologue in one POV and the rest of the story in a different POV), where it would be acceptable to drift back and forth between third limited and omni?

That's why I qualified it by saying there's nothing wrong if the story is written in omni

I can't think of any trad books published where the POV drifted back and forth from those POV's.

There are books like that. Sometimes a chapter starts in omni to introduce the reader to something and then it reverts to limited (or maybe even 1st).

I just read something about some famous authors getting away with head-hopping. I mean changing to a new character's POV with a new paragraph. The comment was, unless you're a famous author, don't do that. You won't get away with it. But the point is, if you tell a great story, you can get away with most anything.

That's what I thought. I was just seeking clarification. Thanks.

I replied to you that I got it. Haven't had time to read it.

I replied to you that I got it. Haven't had time to read it.

That's fine. I just wanted to make sure you got it. Guess I need to check my own Spam folder!

I sent you another email today. I was able to open the first attachment, but not the second. I think the first one was the editor's because it had biscuit and Bowie knife.

I sent you another email today. I was able to open the first attachment, but not the second. I think the first one was the editor's because it had biscuit and Bowie knife.

I sent you new pdf versions of the files, assuming something inside my .doc files was screwing up your system.

The "biscuit" (instead of the American "cookie") was her oversight, the "Bowie knife" was mine, as it was an investment piece stored in his office--one of the original Bowie knifes used in an Indian attack, and which wasn't an effective killing weapon as a result (since the owner didn't want to sharpen it and reduce it's value by removing the blade's distinctive marks).

I sent you new pdf versions of the files,

I thought I had responded to this, but I don't see it here. I wonder if I did it in another thread.

I liked her version better. I loved her first line. As others, I didn't like some of her changes, but overall I thought it was stronger.

I agree with many of her cuts. It was when she reduced multiple paragraphs to only a couple lines, stripping out entire contents (especially concerning the different characters) that I think I'll reject.

Still, it would be interesting to publish it in this 'tightened' version and see whether my sales go up or down. If simplifying my writing doesn't benefit the story (or boost sales) then it's not worth losing this much sleep over.

The case of the chauffeur (in the first chapter) illustrates the point. I gave a white dude a Jamaican accent, then had him explain why. The point was to reveal his personality, and how his boss reached out to him. She cut the majority of the encounter, leaving him a one-dimensional Jamaican (non-white) because it 'didn't advance the story'. But what it did was to lend credence to the man's advice about what his boss was like, so the readers would pay attention to it.

If you don't pay attention to your characters, then the story is much faster to read. But it's the personal details which make stories intriguing (and the entire scene takes, maybe, three typewritten, double-spaced pages).

If you don't pay attention to your characters, then the story is much faster to read.

CW,

I think that quote is what the issue revolves around. Today, there's a strong feeling in some publishing houses that a story is either an action based story with a lot of fast paced action or a character based story where there's little action because it focusses on the characters and their development. Most of your stuff is a strong mix of both, and I now suspect she didn't see that and was trying to shift it over to the typical action based style story.