Professional Critique News

We've posted a couple of YouWriteOn literary professional critiques below. The professional critiques are extremely useful, not just to the writers who receive them but to all members, as they provide useful and insightful points.


Previous Site News: Top literary agencies to consider YouWriteOn authors

Highly rated chapters on YouWriteOn will be considered by two top literary agencies each month. The agencies are The Christopher Little Literary Agency, whose authors include J.K Rowling; and Curtis Brown, whose authors include Margaret Atwood, Ed McBain and David Lodge.

This is a really excellent opportunity for new authors to get serious consideration by two of the top literary agencies in the publishing industry. The literary agencies are two of the country’s most renowned agencies, and represent some of the world's most successful and well known authors, and are keen to look at highly rated new authors on YouWriteOn.com. 






Literary Professional Critiques - below are two YouWriteOn literary professional critiques. One from June, and one from an earlier month.

Please click below to view the chapters Clouds Gather by James Stevenson. It is advisable to read the chapter so that you may view the professional critique in context.

http://www.youwriteon.com/books/bookdetail.aspx?bookguid=26ab62a5-20cc-41c9-ad6e-b1b03806ec24


Note about the reviewer: Phil Whitaker's Eclipse of the Sun won the John Llewellyn Rhys Prize and a Betty Trask Award, and was shortlisted for the Whitbread First Novel Award. Triangulation won the Encore Award for best second novel. His third novel, The Face, is currently being developed for film. Phil is an occasional tutor in novel writing for the Arvon Foundation; previous appointments include external assessor for the creative writing MA at UEA and judge for 2003 Betty Trask Awards. He is co-founder of the manuscript appraisal service Literary Intelligence. His fourth novel, Freak of Nature, will be published this year.


CLOUDS GATHER by James Stevenson


LITERARY PROFESSIONAL CRITIQUE


Congratulations on qualifying for one of the first ever professional critiques on YouWriteOn. To have achieved this your work has won the admiration of a wide selection of your peers. This should be hugely encouraging to you: what you are doing with your fiction is clearly working. My role here is to try to help you develop it further. There isn’t space to deal with minor line edits, nor can I mention every aspect that might benefit from revision; I shall focus on the big areas I think are crucial to take this to the next level. This process might feel overwhelmingly negative, so please balance it by keeping in mind what a tremendous achievement it is to have got to this stage.

Criticism has the potential to be both inspiring and fatal. I read and critiqued this extract blind, without looking at other reviews, but I’d suggest some rules of thumb. Spend a few days mulling on any criticism before drawing conclusions. If a criticism strikes a chord with you, act on it. If it doesn’t, but if several critics have touched on the same thing, consider very carefully whether to act on it. If a criticism really doesn’t strike a chord, and particularly if no one else has picked up on it, probably ignore it. Lastly, you may find critics evenly divided on an issue, as many pro as con. These are the trickiest to navigate: go with what your instincts tell you.

Right, on with the show.

First and foremost, I want to dwell on ‘Chapter One’, in which Blanche attempts to deliver the Spitfire. This is extremely well written. We start to get a clear idea of Blanche’s character (a rather bold young woman, with an appealing mix of devil-may-care and vulnerability) and also a sense of Peter and what he means to her. We do so through scenes narrated with a highly authentic historical atmosphere. Your research, or your knowledge of flying, is given just the right weight: enough to convince us of the period; not too much that it bogs the story down. Furthermore, the facts of the flight, and the mounting sense of unease as it goes wrong, lend a terrific sense of tone and pace, which strike me as being nigh-on perfectly judged. Well done.

For me, the other chapters (both labelled ‘Chapter Two’) were much less successful. In discussing why, I hope you’ll see how to make this novel as good as it promises to be. First, look at what Chapter One achieves in terms of exterior plot B essentially just the one thing, that Blanche tries to deliver a Spitfire to Exeter and ends up in France. To advance this solitary exterior plot point, Chapter One takes up about a third of the total material in this extract, yet at no stage does it drag. This is because you use incidental detail really well to launch us into Blanche’s interior B we get to know her character, and about her and Peter’s relationship. Your narrative viewpoint is effectively close third person (i.e. ‘she’, but where the narrator is closely identified with Blanche’s own thoughts and feelings). At the same time you maintain a nice tension - Blanche has clearly got herself into trouble; how is it going to pan out? - which keeps the pages turning.

The subsequent chapters reverse the ratio, particularly the last at Mme Cazalet’s. They are heavy on exterior plot points (Blanche falls into French hands; the intention of her captors is ambiguous; they’re going to use Blanche for some purpose, the Eagle project; she’s going to stay at Mme Cazalet’s; Mme Cazalet wants Blanche to become involved in honey-trapping German officers; there’s something called Directive Forty; Mme Cazalet also harbours RAF airmen; Blanche is a nurse as well as a pilot and she's going to assist at an operation; etc etc) and at the same time we rarely enter Blanche’s interior again - so much so that when she learns of Peters death, all we get is a bland half-dozen lines of summary about her feelings ‘fluctuating between grief and rage, lust for revenge and depression’, as opposed to being shown the effect of this news on her. The narrative viewpoint has shifted from close third person to omniscient (i.e. ‘she’, but where the narrator is distant from the character’s interior).

Ironically, while one might think that a flurry of exterior plot development would create a cracking pace, it does precisely the opposite here. We’re no longer engaging with Blanche as a character, we no longer feel we’re reading her story. She’s become the mere focal point as we move through the author’s story about her. These are two very different reading experiences, and, for my money, the former beats the latter hands down every time.

How can you rectify this? Basically by recapturing the closeness to Blanche’s point of view that you had in Chapter One. Continue to show us things through her eyes, as opposed to the eyes of the disinterested omniscient narrator. Get us back inside her head: what does she actually think and feel about the people she encounters, the places she is taken, the experience of captivity, the proposals that are put to her? In tandem with this, you will need and want to slim the exterior plot points down. You may find a much more simplified schema will work far better. My suggestion would be to focus on just two developments. In the first Chapter Two, Blanche is captured and has to prove her story to Dadan (incidentally, I wasn’t entirely convinced by her game-playing; I would have her play the interview straight until the last exchange, about the meaning of ATA, when she finally loses her cool at Dadan’s insatiable inquisition). In the second Chapter Two, have Blanche taken to Mme Cazalet’s and start to get the sense that, far from repatriating her, the French resistance has some as yet unspecified purpose for her. You could have her notice a variety of pretty young girls there, as well as perhaps being taken to assist with the injured airman, but I would leave all mention of Project Eagle, Directive Forty, and honey traps till later in the book. That will pace the narrative better, and it will also create a much more authentic feel, because the reader will be discovering things through Blanche’s experience and observations, not simply being told them by her French interlocutors.

A final point. I wasn’t entirely convinced by the introduction. From your synopsis, the novel is also going to be about Edward, so he does need to be a narrative presence. However, I would not put him in the first person (‘I’). Like you do with Blanche in Chapter One, I’d put him in close third person (i.e. ‘he’, but where the narrator occupies the interior of his head). I would also make the Introduction less obviously portentous. Lines such as ‘twenty-seven years old and still asking the question that nobody could answer ... Aunt Blanche never spoke about my father and I had no one else to ask about how he died’ simply don’t ring true. They are the author (very obviously) setting up Edward’s story. Let us find out about his father obliquely, through an authentic exchange. Be more subtle.

In terms of genre, you place this in ‘action, adventure’, a traditionally male-interest genre. On the basis of the material presented thus far, I’m not sure that’s right. It has more of a feel of historical women’s or even literary fiction, with Blanche as a promising female lead, and with emphasis on relationships and character as much as danger and derring-do. It could be that subsequent material will take it into straight ‘action, adventure’, in which case this opening is a problem in that it doesn’t establish the genre at the outset. But I hope not. I hope this evolves along the lines presented here. You could end up with something with the appeal of Ian McEwan’s Atonement. To do so, keep the exterior plot convincingly simple, and advance it at a careful pace to maximise its tension. At the same time, explore character and relationship with complexity and insight.

Well done on all you have achieved thus far. I hope my comments help you to take this on. It should be well worth it.

Phil Whitaker

Literary professional critique from June

Please click below to view the chapters The Whole Ball of String by Kenn Sealey. The professional literary reviewer was very impressed with the quality of the chapters. 

http://www.youwriteon.com/books/bookdetail.aspx?bookguid=6c7eb757-e3c0-4d9a-a11d-e53642e038dc

In the next post is the critique of the chapters by literary professional Melisa Weatherill.  Melissa's experience includes working as a fiction editor at Simon & Schuster, including sourcing and commissioning new titles, and overseeing books from manuscript to final product. Her specialities include commercial women’s fiction, literary fiction, historical fiction, crime and thriller. She has worked with authors such as Jules Hardy, Jennifer Weiner, Kathy Lette, Lynda La Plante, Adriana Trigiani, Kate O’Riordan, Annabel Dilke, Victoria Glendinning, Mary Higgins Clark.

Professional Critique on THE WHOLE BALL OF STRING by Kenn Sealey

Many congratulations on being chosen as one of the top five submissions for the month – I can absolutely see why your fellow writers and readers rated your material so highly as it’s a really strong piece of writing and one which had me gripped. However, as I’m sure you know, it’s not just a good strong plot that makes a successful thriller, but the way the plot is executed, the way dramatic tension is sustained, the way the reader is kept constantly guessing and twists aren’t given away too early or sloppily, all of which is hard to judge from merely a few chapters and a synopsis. Nevertheless, I can say ‘so far so good’ and hopefully this critique will give you the encouragement and platform to build on such a promising start.

I think the most constructive thing I can do here is to dissect your material into key areas, discuss what works well, what doesn’t and take it from there. Please do remember however that everything I say is only advice rather than gospel!

Plot and structure:
You have written a brilliant opening chapter/prologue which sucks in the reader quite mercilessly. It packs quite a punch with its gruesome detail, creepy voice and deeply frightening events. It’s the perfect way to open a thriller; one which effectively sets the tone for a dark and sinister read and one that will have the reader trying to identify your twisted perpetrators every time they meet a new character. So, allow me to congratulate you on that separately!

After the first chapter it reverts to the first person and slows down to a more sedate pace, to enable the reader to get their bearings and catch their breath. There isn’t that much more I can say about the structure here, as these chapters act as more of a laying-down of the groundwork, for the reader to get acquainted with the cast and surroundings. However, it seems to be heading in the right direction.

Apart from a few small details that occurred to me, as outlined below, plot-wise, you seem to be on the right track. Judging from the synopsis, it is good that you have a multi-strand approach. A few different crimes, different intrigues (both private and public) are key to an involving, pacy thriller. You have Lauren’s disappearance as the main plot out of which branch the subplots of the missing backpackers ten years earlier; the kayakers; Lauren’s secret life as discovered by Bannon; Bannon’s own secrets and problems; Cassie’s story and that of her grandfather; not to forget the story of the community itself and all that goes on behind its small-town walls. Again, without reading the whole thing it is hard to have an accurate overview of how this all hangs together, yet you have done a good job in these opening pages of setting it all up. It promises a rewarding and gripping reading experience. I also like the way it is divided into days of the week.

A couple of small observations about the plot: I wasn’t convinced by the supply teacher taking over Lauren’s home when she’s only been missing for a week. Nor by the fact that very little attempt has been made to pack away her belongings to make room for him. Maybe it’s the mountain way, but it felt a little disrespectful towards her! Is there nowhere else more appropriate he can stay? Her house is referred to as a residence a couple of times; does that mean that it doesn’t actually belong to Lauren, but to the town and any old person can be billeted there? It smacks of being a little bit ‘devicey’ and handy that he can have access to her diaries and perhaps just needs another line or two to clarify the situation.

This point overlaps with characterisation, but I wonder if it’s wise furnishing both Lauren and Cassie with a – how shall I put it? – shady private life? The synopsis describes Lauren’s secret sex life, and then Cassie is branded a ‘wicked woman’ by Kathy Bernardi, which could become a little confusing, mostly for Dan who seems to fall under the spell of both straight away in addition to his yearnings for his ex, Kirsten. For instance, on page 18, he’s dreaming of Lauren, yet he’s recently admitted he’s probably fallen in love with Cassie. I’m not saying he can’t be in love (or in lust) with three women at the same time, but it might become a little tricky…

Setting:
A snowy, bleak, small mountain town is a great setting for a thriller and offers lots of scope for an evocative sensory feast, most significantly a visual one. It brought to mind the town in Twin Peaks. However, I felt these pages could benefit from a little more description of the town; the reader relies on Dan to discover their new whereabouts and although I felt I had a good general sense of the place, I wanted to be able to see more of the minutiae as Dan sees them.

Characterisation:
The characters I’ve met so far are well-drawn and real, and promise interesting human drama.

Dan comes across as an engaging, intriguing main character; a sort of hapless townie who bites off more than he can chew. He reminds me a bit of Sergeant Howie in The Wicker Man. Although Dan is not a detective, he is the innocent outsider who infiltrates a closed society to solve a mystery and ends up getting involved in a whole host of his own. I did however feel Dan could do with a little bit more description e.g. age, hair colour etc. I only have a rather nebulous picture of him in my mind.

It’s a tiny point, but having the two lead male roles with similar one-syllable names might be a tad confusing. I found I got the two mixed up quite a bit.

Cassie: In the synopsis we learn she’s found fame and fortune, but there is no hint of this when we meet her. Nevertheless, she seems to be an attractive and intriguing character.

I like Ben a lot. He’s the benevolent conscience of the town; the all-seeing, all-knowing patriarch who provides the humour and lightness to the narrative. However, I’m sure he has his own fair share of secrets and darkness that will come out in due course…

Writing style:
You write very well. Your style is immediate and confident with the right amount of witty dialogue and sassy observation. Writing in the first person can be tricky, but Dan has a strong and sympathetic enough voice to guide the reader effortlessly through the pages. Be careful, however, of being too ‘signposty’, of dropping hints of what is to come. It’s a device many writers use, but in my mind, it’s a lazy way of attempting to create tension and one which ultimately slows down the pace of the narrative too much. For instance, on page 11: ‘if only I had known about the nerve upon which I so carelessly trod’. Or on page 14 ‘If I had known her better…’

Similarly, phrases like: ‘I still indulge with Ben’s “live a little” line ringing in my ear’ on page 10 suddenly pull the reader out of the moment and into the present which somehow undermines the drama. Telling a story with too much hindsight can be detrimental in my opinion. I would have him simply telling his story in the past tense with no reference to life after the event until the end. Does that make sense?

Specific line-editing points:

Page 1 ‘They hadn’t even locked the door, not that it made any difference’. Why? Because he has a spare key? Suggest adding a line.

Page 2 Inconsistency between ‘they should be out for hours’ and ‘they could wake at any moment’. There is no sense of how much time has elapsed, which makes it confusing.

Page 5 What’s a ‘chalkie’? A couple of Australian expressions might need explaining for the UK reader. See also ‘robe’ for wardrobe.

Page 9 ‘Bloody Mexican necktie.’ Not clear what this is referring to.

Page 10 ‘I knew I had asked the wrong question’ In what way is his question wrong? Not clear.

Page 16 ‘I had enjoyed a relaxing day’. Working all day doesn’t strike me as that relaxing!

Page 18 ‘peak’ or ‘peek’?


Final Analysis:
Judging by these pages, this has the potential to be a great thriller. The dark sexual angle combined with ingredients of a more traditional thriller, as well as a host of great characters and a competent writing style could make this into a very commercial and appealing proposition. The thriller market is a tough one, but there is always a demand for a fantastic new voice, new premise, new concept. If you can sustain the level of these opening pages, then you have something worth touting around. I wish you lots of luck with it and I thank you for an exciting read.