An apology to my first-draft beta readers
I found an old version of the novel on which I'm currently working. This was the first-draft version I sent out to my beta readers. There is only one thing I must say. I am so, so sorry. One of Stephen King's pieces of advice to authors is that your first draft will suck. Mine adds credence to that view.
If you take certain pieces of writing advice to heart, my opening chapter of the first draft isn't that bad. It is a collection of sharp, declarative sentences. There is a thin line of continuity. I introduce main characters and put them in perilous times. That makes it sound as if I don't need to make that heartfelt apology. The problem is that the first draft was missing so much. It lacked depth. It lacked delineation of character, especially for the two main characters. My main character, my protagonist, was a spectator. He wasn't immersed in interactions with either fellow characters or setting. How's that for overlooking main goals?
What made it worse is that first draft followed that lackluster beginning with a series of storyline obstacles. That was pointed out by the literary agent who took my full manuscript. He liked my writing. He liked that my style was accessible to a large segment of readers. What he didn't like was my pacing. To put it simply, I took forever to get to the very point of the story. Again, beta readers, I am sorry.
My most direct beta reader for either first or second draft said she didn't find the novel interesting until I got deep into the story. Why? I didn't get to the crux of the story. I took a logical path from event to event, but I didn't take into account the pacing. She didn't use the exact term "pacing," but that was her complaint.
Where did I go wrong? Much of the opening part of my first and second drafts centered on the interpersonal relationships. Husband and wife, neighbor and neighbor, parent and child held sway. When I wrote my query letter, I accented one event that takes my protagonist and his safe little world and turned them upside down. I didn't reach that event until the twentieth chapter in my first draft. I moved that up to the eleventh chapter in my second draft. After receiving the agent's reply, I moved that chapter up to the fourth spot. Much of those interpersonal battles are softened or removed because they slowed the pace. Yes, there are still husband vs. wife and neighbor vs. neighbor conflicts, but they are more focused. I don't go on and on with anecdotal evidence. I get to the gist of the story early. Isn't that the point of a solid novel?
Yes, Mr. King, my first draft sucked. I know that this version, my sixth draft, needs revision, but I need the trained eye of an expert to confront those issues. I am going through my novel another time to make sure major changes I made are consistent with the storyline. Do my characters reflect an inner complexity for which I strive? Is there that continuous peril that is the focal point of my author platform? I know I made a better novel. Now I have to persuade a literary agent with my writing.
Wish me luck.
If you take certain pieces of writing advice to heart, my opening chapter of the first draft isn't that bad. It is a collection of sharp, declarative sentences. There is a thin line of continuity. I introduce main characters and put them in perilous times. That makes it sound as if I don't need to make that heartfelt apology. The problem is that the first draft was missing so much. It lacked depth. It lacked delineation of character, especially for the two main characters. My main character, my protagonist, was a spectator. He wasn't immersed in interactions with either fellow characters or setting. How's that for overlooking main goals?
What made it worse is that first draft followed that lackluster beginning with a series of storyline obstacles. That was pointed out by the literary agent who took my full manuscript. He liked my writing. He liked that my style was accessible to a large segment of readers. What he didn't like was my pacing. To put it simply, I took forever to get to the very point of the story. Again, beta readers, I am sorry.
My most direct beta reader for either first or second draft said she didn't find the novel interesting until I got deep into the story. Why? I didn't get to the crux of the story. I took a logical path from event to event, but I didn't take into account the pacing. She didn't use the exact term "pacing," but that was her complaint.
Where did I go wrong? Much of the opening part of my first and second drafts centered on the interpersonal relationships. Husband and wife, neighbor and neighbor, parent and child held sway. When I wrote my query letter, I accented one event that takes my protagonist and his safe little world and turned them upside down. I didn't reach that event until the twentieth chapter in my first draft. I moved that up to the eleventh chapter in my second draft. After receiving the agent's reply, I moved that chapter up to the fourth spot. Much of those interpersonal battles are softened or removed because they slowed the pace. Yes, there are still husband vs. wife and neighbor vs. neighbor conflicts, but they are more focused. I don't go on and on with anecdotal evidence. I get to the gist of the story early. Isn't that the point of a solid novel?
Yes, Mr. King, my first draft sucked. I know that this version, my sixth draft, needs revision, but I need the trained eye of an expert to confront those issues. I am going through my novel another time to make sure major changes I made are consistent with the storyline. Do my characters reflect an inner complexity for which I strive? Is there that continuous peril that is the focal point of my author platform? I know I made a better novel. Now I have to persuade a literary agent with my writing.
Wish me luck.
Comments
Post a Comment