What’s an Award Worth? (ConCarolinas 2015 Writing Panel Notes)

Hi everyone! Just like last year, I spent the end of May and beginning of June at ConCarolinas, followed by a writing retreat. I had a great time at the con as usual, and then at the retreat I feel like I had a chance to deepen my craft. (That's what happens when you get a group of like-minded folks together for honest, earnest critiquing. And okay, the lake house we rented had a hot tub, so that didn't hurt.) After a spot of beta-reading for my awesome CP, I'm ready to get back to my work.

I'm actually going to keep my promise (to myself) to get on the older notes (relatively) first, because I have a lot of stuff I'd like to share from Emerald City and even (eep) a few from the last SIWC. But this topic felt important.

Please note: I know this is a sensitive subject. Yes, I have my opinions. Let's leave it at that. As with every other occasion, I'm just sharing my notes on the panel. That said, I do think that there were a few positive messages to take away from this, especially moving forward.

* * *

What’s an Award Worth?

Wendy S. Delmater, Gray Rinehart, Edmund R. Schubert, John Hartness, John Scalzi

Moderator: Misty Massey

There are a lot of different awards attached to genre fiction (Hugo, Nebulas, Stoker, etc). What’s an award worth to working writers?

WD: Abyss & Apex (which she edits) got honourable mentions, recommended reading lists, best ofs, etc.

GR: Hugo nomination for novelette.

ES: Also was nominated, and IGMS they tried but they were able to sidestep that, and they’ve won a few awards. Was once nominated for an Edgar. Years’ best anthologies, honourable mentions, etc.

JS: Hugo, Locus, Romantic Times,  Geffin (Israel), Kurzlazfitz (Germany), Scion (Japan), nominated for Nebula, Norton, award in Spain, Audie, and others.

MM: Mad Kestrel was nominated for SC young adult book award.

JH: Recenlty won best horror for 2014, was nominated for 2013, and one story from Big Bad 2 got honorable mention, and was once nominated for Pushcart prize for poetry. And Charlotte writers for poetry.

So what are they worth to you as writing professionals?

JS: Depends on the award, the context, and the time. Winning the Campbell award was significant because it was the one that put him on the map as a writer. It was useful to him because it differentiated him from other new writers out that year. Hugo was useful because with it comes outward prestige (known outside of the genre). Example: helped expediate his contract with Hollywood for a contract. The rest of the awards have been nice to have on the shelf, but in terms of moving the needle have been the Campbell and the Hugo.

GR: The awards being differentiators: awards that an author can point to for even eing a finalist or a semifinalist can becomes a differentiator because he can expect more and get more because the ahtuor has already proben themselves in that field.

WD: Does the same for short fiction. Especially new writers. They help develop new writers, and grow careers. They have people whose careers they helped start. To help, they’ve put them in for awards, and they can use that as a cover letter credit to take it to the next level. Having cover letter credits is a big deal. An award means that people notice you, but it also boosts a writer’s confidence.

ES: Challenges is that the writers grow up to move on to writing novels and are so busy writing novels that you need to bring in a new wave. Like a graduating class.

WS: Award winners get preferential reading.

JS: With the accolade comes a certain expectation. Which can be great for them because their next book gets reviewed. And that expectation doesn’t go away. It continues to be brought up. An expectation reconfiguration. The awards for later books are really awards for previous work done. But to win an award is to have criticism both positive nad negative. Which can have an effect on your

ES: MRK: The leading indicator on whether you’re likely to win a hugo is whether or not you’ve won a hugo.

JS: Neil Gaiman turned down an award for 2006 because he sincerely believed it had stopped being about the work and started being about Neil. Passed it on.

ES: It’s not always about the best players, it’s about the most popular players, being rewarded for work that came before. Not a problem, but a reality.

JS: Yes. Example: Redshirts. Is it his best? The year he was nominated, he had been nominated three times before and had never won. Aside from the quality of the book, there was everything that goes on with the aspect of the award; everyone knew he’d been nominated for before, and it was also a good year to be nominated. It’s not only about where you are in your career, but also about the year and the playing field, and you have to be okay with that. Otherwise you get bitter and defensive.

JH: And no one gave Redshirts an award for best SF novel of all time. It’s a snapshot. A moment of “this is the opinion of this voting block for this year”.

JS: When he won the Locus award, one thing he said was “I wish it had been given to Ian Banks”. Because the award represented the body of his works that year. But again, it’s a matter of what the playing field is in a given year and who people are voting for. When you get nominated, you have to be aware of all the dynamics, and it helps you to have someone whispering in your ear, “Thou art mortal”.

WD: It’s worth different things on different levels. Recognition. It pushes people to the next level.

JH: Example: Hopes that an award will push him from attending pro to guest status at DragonCon.

WD: It gets you out of the slush pile, onto the radar, and hopefully into a better situation, career-wise.

GR: It means that he (in charge of the slush pile at BAEN) won’t be the first to look at the book. (and in 7 yrs, so far only 2 of 6200 submissions have actually made it from the slush pile to the shelves). Some manuscripts have been in consideration for a long time because there may be a chance that they say yes. But then, the first book he did get out of the slush pile has gone on to be Nebula-nominated. Writers of the Future award winners have gone to the top, too.

WD: The numbers are important because having some small award will get you notice. Publishes 25 out of 2000 submissions a year.

GR: Same thing all over the place, even with venture capitalists.

Did you find the award gave you a confidene boost in terms of the work and how you presented yourself?

JH: A confidence boost in his work, and in the way he presents. Doesn’t often mention to other writers that he’s won an award because he doesn’t want to be tacky, but looks at it as a tool when talking to someone outside of the industry, or someone who doesn’t know him, or . When it’s effective. (BK 4 won an Epic award). But it gives him a personal confidence boost that people he didn’t know liked it enough to give him an award.

JS: Confidence not so much, but looks at the awards dispassionately: as tools, as shorthand used strategically to introduce yourself to other folks. With his unusual career, he didn’t have to struggle to get published. Name recognition and awareness in the genre hasn’t really been a problem. He used to be a newspaper columnist, so he came in with a built-in audience. That said, he uses those things strategically. When trying to get attention of people outside of the genre. When Tor was looking at his first book, aware that he came with that audience. When he won the hugo, the main feeling he had was “Yes!” but it was a relief to have won that and to be done with that. He’s already won, so he doesn’t have to think about this anymore. The sense of palpable relief. The awards come with their own dynamics nad pressures and they can loom artificially large in the minds of writers. Hard to explain to some writers on the other side of the fence. It’s great, but then you go home and now there’s the expectation that the next book better be great. He got the deal last week because he has a track record for sales, not because of the award. Terry Pratchett even turned a nomination down in 2005 because it did nothing for him.

WD: Connie Willis  was like an early lifetime achievement award. Not so much about the book. And that’s okay.

ES: Yes, but if you say, “Who gives a shit?”, then why are there wars?

JS: He felt relief when he won the Hugo, because he’d been nominated 3 times before, and went through the pressure, and there’s not necessarily a finite number of times you’ll be nominated, but fashions change, tastes change, and this time that he won it was ripe. Eventually that window closes.

JH: Award winners from the 70s are very different from award winners in the 80s and 90s, and Redshirts might not have even been published in an earlier decade because it was a style that wouldn’t have been published back then.

JS: If he hadn’t won, there’s a chance he might have been upset. It’s a mark of distinction and acceptance in the community. Desire makes us do lots of things, positively and negatively. A lot of the wars come down to desire. “Why aren’t I and the things I love properly appreciated?” And the one thing he agrees with is that there is nothing in any type of science fiction or fantasy that should not be considered for awards, or good writing.

Awards are not what the field is about. They are a signatory, a snapshot of what the field is, but that snapshot is incomplete. There’s so much going on outside of that snapshot that it’s hard for someone not in the window or the snapshot that this isn’t necessarily a criticism of what they love. Some people can handle that, and some feel differently. You cannot tell people that the way they feel is invalid. They are who they are. But remind people that there’s more to life. There’s sales. And fans. People who say “That speaks to me, and you have changed my life by writing that thing.” Focus on those moments, not just on the award, as validation. He can’t say that what any of the Puppies feel is invalid.

WD: And you’ve been reasonable.

JS: No, I’ve been snarky as shit.

JH: But that’s what we refer to as a given circumstance.

JS: That’s why you’ll never hear me say anything bad about the people who are nominated. The question is not whether they can or should be nominated; it’s a question of whether in this particular instance  was the reason they got onto the ballot without controversy. This year, no.

JH: People want to write what they have written. Wants a Stoker so he can get a better deal, and if he gets those things without the statue, okay, fine, but if he gets the statue that’s even better.

About the Sad and Rabid Puppies and the Hugo awards …

WD: She was there on the inside of that. 15 of the 18 nominees were Rabid Puppies.

GR: Was also a Puppies nomination. After much thought, he has arrived at the metaphor that he was offered a ticket on an airplane, said he’d take that ride, and then the plane got hijacked. And the plane landed and took off again, and there’s people on the plane who want it to crash, and people on the ground who want to shoot it down, and he just wants to get off.

JS: Is reading everything. Will rank his reading appropriately. Regardless of the dynamics, there are people on the ballot this year who could and should be on the ballot. People who got on the plane and were surpreised what happened from there. Ultimately, for the same reason he doesn’t go out of his way to criticize other writers’ writing, he’s going to give the writers the same consideration he hopes others would give to his writing.

GR: Other people voting, they’re very wound up over this, and not sure about voting. Lately, he’s told people that if the situation has poisoned it for them, then don’t read his story. Reading should be a pleasure. If there’s some outside force making it displeasurable, then go find something that will give you pleasure.

ES: Decided to get out because they didn’t nominate him for an award because of his work; they were making a political statement. Felt like there was too much going on.

JS: The one thing he thinks about regarding this whole matter is that we do get wrapped up in awards. Yes, it’s the tail that wags the dog, but regardless, it has made us as a community think, what are these awards about, and why do they matter? The one silver lining is that it’s led to a new discussion, appreciation and understanding of what awards are, can be, and should be, and he cannot argue that this was not a discussion that was not necessary for science fiction and fantasy. It wasn’t the way he’d have had it, but at least now it’s happening.

Bringing Life to your Characters (ConCarolinas 2012 Writing Panel Notes)

Slow-clap time. Yup, more way-belated notes from ConCarolinas 2012. And yaaay, I'm going to ConCarolinas 2013! I honestly wasn't sure if I could ... but hey. Nothing like being in a car that was rear-ended and finally getting an insurance settlement for it, six months later. Yeah. Sigh. Okay, I got off easy. But I still haven't made it back to sword class ...

So. I've been busy revising-following-agent-requests-at-SIWC, beta-reading (for one must give in order to also receive), and suffering through the latest nasty plague going around. But I survived, just in time for the holidays. At the start of the month, well before I came down with that awful cold, I made new discoveries on how to ensure a smooth tiger butter. I'll be sharing those fun facts shortly. Promise. No, really, I mean it ...

But first, enjoy these notes.

* * *

Bringing Life to Your Characters
Edmund Schubert, James Maxey, Faith Hunter, Terry W. Erwin II,  A.J. Hartley, Teresa Frohock, John G. Hartness
Moderator: David B. Coe
Bringing life to living characters who are alive, creating believable characters

DBC: What is your biggest challenge?
TF: Keeping the focus on the main character, the protagonist
JM: The character has to be constantly learning from their experiences. A lot of that goes into the foundation of any character you create. What was their childhood like? What shaped them as they grew into an adult? What shaped them? Healthy well-adjusted people are not his typical character. His typical character are broken, not necessarily great people.
JH: Information hoarding – not telling the reader what the main charaacters’ dirty little secrets are, except bit by bit (1 or 2 a book). Little pieces here and there, backstory in dribs and drabs.
FH: Outlines her books – the conflict thoroughly. Every *thing*. Just doesn’t know exactly how the characters are going to react to things.
AJ: Middlegrade/YA vs adult; When dealing with younger chars, they don’t have as much backstory, haven’t had time to accumulate baggage; the biggest thing was that there’s such little difference otherwise. RL Stein: “Most things that scare kids are the same that scare adults. People are afraid of the dark, the unknown, things with lots of legs, etc.” Shift in mindset was to stop worrying about it. Easier to just think of them as people he could write. With Macbeth, someone else’s character, he takes his experience in theatre, sees it in theatres and treats it accordingly. Even though these chars are familiar, in some ways they’re blank slates. Took them as his protagonists. Made his characters people.

DBC: What do you look for in a character?
ES: (What does he look for in character)? There are so many things that don’t work. What does work: What makes him want to spend time with a char is  one entertaining and surprising at the same time. Not theatrical, but interesting to be around. By getting to see all the different sides of them. Tries to make the protags dirty as possible while keeping them likable, antagonists who are doing horrible things for the best reasons possible.  Compressing compelling chars into a short story? It’s challenging. So much harder to write great short story. Short stories have to be laser-like in focus. One or two key details to tell the reader what he needs to know. Katniss in The Hunger Games – you get the sense she’s trying to take care of her sister and mother, but she loves her sister so she lets the awful cat stay. Efficient, effective opening In the first 5 pages, worth studying.

DBC: Are there elements to writing comedic vs. serious characters?
JH: What really helps define a character: choice of dialogue. Also background in theatre. Reading dialogue, being able to dial in your dialogue really does help. You set the tone for a char. Has to catch himself when writing the straight guy. Being serious is a challenge. Also steals from the classic tropes of comedy.

DBC (to JM): Did you have a different approach in your superhero books vs. your Dragon Forge books?
JM: Uses a lot of tropes in action. Protagonist has the burden of changing, but the comic relief are tropes. In his action novels he has the character type he’d call the badass. He doesn’t need all of them to have a lot of internal conflict. But can’t wirte a book with just these tpes of chars. Needs someone who’s weak. Someone who’s changes. Also, we want to know what a character’s intentions are. What they want to accomplish.

TF: You don’t always want to insert 21st century attitudes into historical characters.  As much as we’d like to think that we’d do better, she wants them to act and react realistically. She needs to be conscious of their thought processes. “Your story is your character’s emotional growth  Your plot is how you get him there. And all the things that happen to the character will enhance the story and promote that emotional growth.”

DBC: What about point of view?

TE: What’s the best way to tell the story to the reader? Which POV works best? E.g. 1st person – can be useful, can be tricky. The reader learns as the character learns. Still some mystery about that character.

FH: Beast and Jane – first person point of view. Must include all parts of them. The multiple personalities. Editor made sure 2 first person voices are different.  POV is whoever body they’re in. The most important POV is whichever body they’re in.

AJ: ACT OF WILL – First person. DARWEN ARKWRIGHT AND THE PEREGRINE PACT: Third person. In case of Will, when you tell a story in first person the story becomes about the character. Everything’s mediated by the character. Every sense, every impression. Middle grade third person, very limited to just Darwen, you see nothing the character isn’t present for. This is a standard for middle grade right now. Close enough to him that we’re never really outside of his conscious.

DBC: Audience question: Sherlock's not a sympathetic character, but that’s why Watson’s there. What have you done with your non-sympathetic characters?

DBC: Yes, the main character in the Winds of the Forelands wasn’t sympathetic, but his supporting cast was. Hard not just because he was mean, spoiled, and obnoxious, but because these other chars affected him and he grew.

FH: Jane Yellowrock isn’t likeable herself, but she has those around her to love, which makes her easier to like

ES: Even if we don’t like a character, we can respect him.

AJ: Will is not likeable, but he’s charming.

Audience Question: What about characters with Otherness?

JH: You can’t relate to the other, unless you find a way to write the other so they’re something you understand.

JM: Dragons and Vampires can explain themselves, if they can talk, but if your story is about the difficulty of communicating with an alien/other mind,that itself can be a major part of the story.

AJ: Even if it’s just people from a different period, you lose the reader.
DBC: The inscrutability brings terror. But if you want them to have emotions.

Audience Question: Can you write any good heroes anymore, outside of YA, just the good guy who’s a good guy?

AJ: Yes if he’s also crap at a lot of stuff.

TE: Make him relateable. Who tries to do the right thing but doesn’t always succeed. Just keep them human. Not perfect.

ES: Whatever you do, your char must have some flaws, things to overcome. An internal struggle as well as an external struggle.

JH: You can play a paladin, just make him a paladin with a dexterity of 4.

Audience chime-in: Put the character in situations where he can't uphold his moral code.

JH: Torture your characters – half the fun of being a writer (torturing your readers the other half)

DBC (on villains): The degree of which you can make sympathetic villains, and the blending of flawed and good for both characters, is also important. Not just evil for evil’s sake. Every character is the hero of their own story. Even the villains.

Screwing the Pooch

Before I begin: I was honoured to be interviewed this week by Angelina Hansen as a "Partner on the Path". Check it out! If you want to know more about me, that is. *grin*

* * *
It probably seems counterintuitive to be writing a blog post when I'm already a tiny bit overdue in finishing my [EXPLETIVE REDACTED] WIP and sending it off to the professional parties who have requested it. But this past week I had a ... um, I won't call it an epiphany, because part of me has had a feeling I was headed that way anyway. And "slap in the face" implies that someone slapped me. Realization? That sounds so ... lame. But yeah, "realization" is probably the best way to put it for now.

It started with Monday's Magical Words post, on Revisions and Editors. I asked, "Is it possible to reach a point where you can’t see any more problems and you *need* to send it to the editor/agent? (Or in the unpublished case, where hopefully it’s decent enough that an agent will take it on?) I’ve been held back from sending out my WIP by this constant vicious cycle of 'it needs more work', but it’s starting to grate on me."

The response I received?

Laura, yes, there is absolutely a point after which further revision doesn't do you any good. [...] No matter when you sell your book, and no matter who you sell it to, you're going to have an editor who wants to make changes to the book. Every editor is different; every editor will identify different strengths and weaknesses, and there is no way for you to anticipate every criticism. At some point you just have to send it out and trust that while the book is not perfect, it is good enough that an editor will recognize its potential.

I posted the link to my personal Facebook account, as I often do with articles I like. (Hi, total MW groupie here. *waves* ... *blushes* ... *hides*)

For the third time in my life, I received a piece of advice that because I've heard it so often, it feels like old hat and my brain glazes over. Three significant times I heard it where I distinctly recall the advice actually registering.

The first time was ten years ago, when I went to see Science Fiction author Spider Robinson give a talk on his latest novel, THE FREE LUNCH. (And thus began my addiction to Spider Robinson ... but that's a tale for another time.)

The second time was my very first Surrey International Writer's Conference. It was 2006, so a solid 5 years had passed. Robert J. Sawyer gave a keynote speech and included it in his "best advice for writers".

The third time that it actually registered, though, was Monday. One of the fantasy authors I'm honoured to be friends with, John Hartness, commented on my link and recited the advice there, which originally came from the Grand Master himself:

ROBERT A. HEINLEIN'S RULES FOR WRITING

#1. You Must Write.

#2. You Must Finish What You Write.

#3. You Must Refrain from Rewriting, Except to Editorial Order.

#4. You Must Put Your Story On The Market.

#5. You Must Leave It On The Market Until It Sells.

#6. You Must Start Working On Something Else.

And every time I heard that advice, a part of me thought, "Well, I *am* writing something. But it's not ready yet." (Don't get me wrong; I did send a few things out over the years, just not as much as I could have.) I even laughted it off on Monday because of course I've heard that.

But this time, it started to naggle at me. I'm not sending it out yet because I keep trying to fix it, to make it sparkle before an agent or editor's eyes see it. Because I have ongoing issues of worrying whether I'm "good enough" yet.

To continue the thought started in that post: in bracing for the answer once again being no, I've been screwing the pooch at sending things out.

Fear of failure again?

Or worse: fear of succcess?

See, one thing that has been consistent lately over the last few years has been positive feedback on what I've submitted. So if I've been very moderately successful, what's holding me back?

And I meant what I said at Magical Words on Monday. I'm starting to get a bit sick of my heartsong. So why the heck am I dithering about finishing this piece?

Failure won't exactly mean "going back to the drawing board", either. The last few times I failed, I took one rejection as failure, and scrapped my work (or at least stuffed it in the proverbial drawer). This time, and once again thanks to the sage advice at (you guessed it) Magical Words, I know better than to take a single "no" as "you suck". I can keep sending it out. (Oh, hello RAH Advice #5.)

I may be a little bit afraid of success. Can't deny that. But I'm more afraid of being the one who never succeeds because she never tries. That's what the contest entries a few weeks back were all about, right?

So. Here we are. I have a list of scenes and fixes that need to be written to deal with any glaring plot issues. There are 17 changes (not all of them whole scenes, thankfully) that need to be made. I am going to aim for at least 2 per day.

Because honestly, I'm ready to be done.

And #6 is looking mighty tasty right now ...