Loving this. Especially the bit about writing with whatever helps you write (pen and paper, Word, etc). I wrote over a dozen books with pencil and paper because I didn't have a computer. Now I use Word. (But also dabbling with LibreOffice) All I'd really say that matters is that an author writes however they're most comfortable (whether paper or computer. Plotting, pantsing, or a hybrid of both) and do their best to not stress on the "must-do" lists other authors put out. Because no two authors are exactly the same, just as no two projects that an author works on is exactly the same.
Omg it freaked me out as I was trying to log into campfire (I use the free version lol) bc I for some reason couldn't remember it, y'all MENTION CAMPFIRE!!!! I wasn't rlly listening and just heard that as I was scrolling on my phone for an old confirmation email, omg that scared me haha. My personal take on it: I am a Google doc fanatic but because of piling all my ideas into one doc for the past few years, then trying to organize it at the end of the doc (which failed) using another two docs + campfire is low-key saving me rn as the organizing disaster that I am 😭. Like I wish on Google docs instead of bullet points it's drop downs. Thats like the main reason I like campfire as well as the many manyyy areas to type (too many tbh I don't need statistics and all that haha) but its really helpful for someone like me who can't remember what I decided on/doesn't have the ideas I have memorized as a full intertwined plot
I use Scrivener and for me it is quite intimidating. There is so much there that I get overwhelmed. I can't remember where to find all of the options and I spend so much time trying to find things like notes and scene cards and things like that that I lose a lot of writing time. Not that I don't like the software, I do, but I don't think I use it to the best of it's abilities.
precisely this! i know many writers who get so caught up in software and organisation that they never get to the writing, which is the only part that really matters
I've never quite understood the concept of being "stingy" with words. They aren't material things. They don't even take up paper anymore in the age of electronic media. The idea makes me sad. I love language and learning new words is such a treat for me when I'm reading. Give me all the interesting words, give me sentences that challenge me and complex metaphors. It's what makes reading engaging. I love when it makes my brain work. I think you mean "be respectful of a reader's time", which I do agree with, but being stingy just has such a joyless ring to it, as if you resent the process of sharing words itself. There are plenty of "stingily-written" books out there that are flat out insulting to a reader's time. For me, austerity of words is a poor indicator of quality. Give me more, just make it interesting!
@@ContessaDark i like to think of it as knowing the right amount of words to use to get to a point or to the heart of a story. as an editor i often work with very overwritten manuscripts where a single point is drilled down on or repeated over and over again, when it could have been a lot more impactful if it was written about with fewer words. i have nothing against complex sentences, metaphors or interesting words. my point was more about the content behind those words. and i think its actually less about your reader’s time, but more about their ability to understand things. my editorial principle for this goes hand-in-hand with ‘show don’t tell,’ so that an author doesn’t come off as if they’re dumbing things down for their readers, or repeating information a reader already knows. hope that makes sense!
@@theplottery It does, though overwriting is different from over-explaining. There are concepts that just don't translate to people with access to everything (just try telling internet-raised generations that most of a country doesn't actually KNOW what the Prince looks like, just what a portrait looks like--if they were lucky enough to ever see one. It breaks their brains, but is a fundamental component of the "hidden royalty" trope.) It depends what you're writing, of course, but I'm a "forest AND trees" reader. I enjoy granular detail as well as narrative distance which lets me recontextualize what I've been told so far. I appreciate an editor's eye, you all can truly save something great from the bin, but sometimes you all beat the fun and atmosphere out of things because "it's not necessary". Not necessary for anything other than delivering personality and flavour? And those decisions are all according to a template that is only the most recent iteration of styles that have changed again and again over decades; churned until it feels like a chicken and egg question, when the answer is always the Publisher's Mandate. A lot of buzz leaning to indie authors is because they take risks and challenge convention. It's not perfect, sometimes even a hot mess, but stands a better chance of surprising the reader. From that perspective, I'll take an overwritten risk any day before a groomed-into-mediocrity manuscript-- i.e. 90% of trad pub (pro-edited) YA fantasy. Those regurgitated, trope-bloat, snooze-fests are on *your* profession. Where's the gate-keeping everyone talks about for *that* stuff? Sorry, that was rude, not every editor is like that, but you hit on a pet peeve of mine. Maybe that industry-level failure is why my trust in editors has eroded so badly. (That might actually be a good topic for an episode, explaining editing trends, good and bad, and how so much uninspired stuff ends up on the shelves.) I guess, I'm just not seeing how editors are making books better (and if what's pushed out IS the better version ... God help us all.) Still, very much appreciate what you do! It's not easy. Keep up with the podcast! 💖
@@ContessaDark i appreciate that opinion, but i do have to clarify that neither jasmina nor i work for the traditional publishing industry, and indie books and authors still get editors (such as us) to polish up their manuscripts. I never-ever try to slash out anyone’s ideas or writing for the sake of convention, but for the sake of what’s best for their particular story and their particular vision. every editor has their own process and i think they come as unique as the authors. not all editors are going to try to change or groom a manuscript into something else. ive personally never had that experience with anyone who’s edited my work, nor have i done it (i hope) to others. and jasmina is actually a ghostwriter too, and tends to add on words to stories she really connects with. you also have to understand that its always up to the clients we work with whether they agree with and keep our suggestions, or stick to what they had before. i completely agree on how bad commercial fiction has gotten, and cannot believe my eyes when i see the bestseller’s list these days and the quality of the manuscripts that gets put out. and they’re all the same thing over and over again. i can usually tell you exactly what’s going to happen in a book from the first chapter. i recently read one such book for fun and felt like i lost braincells… ended up skimming to the end! i definitely would love to do a critical podcast on commercial fiction trends, but i just know there’s going to be many opinions on that 😂 maybe when we’re a bit more established.
@@theplottery Thank you for your patient and kind reply. I apologize if I came off as harsh or combative. I have complete respect for the work ethic and adaptability that goes into being a free lance editor. It's a real nose-to-the-grindstone job. I do believe you that you listen to your clients and want to get the best out of their stories and my criticism wasn't fair to people like you or Jasmina. I think, because so much CRAP gets onto shelves, my reflex on hearing someone is an editor is: "Yeah? Prove you're not ruining books!", because there are a whole hell of a lot of pro editors out there who are. Some of this also comes from there being so many self-dubbed-editor-overnight people who do nothing but parrot industry jargon-- the "rules" I believe are directly contributing to the lousy state of trad pub books, so when I hear it, my hackles go up. It's especially infuriating when I know people who've written GREAT books, but can't even get them looked at, yet we're inundated with "professionally treated" books that wouldn't be worthy of wiping their novel's ass. It's a real WTF? state for anyone who's even a mildly critical reader. It feels like you can't trust anything anymore; so I just go back to the authors I love and write the stuff I wish was on the shelves. 😥
A NEW PODCAST!!!!!!! ❤❤❤
Loving this. Especially the bit about writing with whatever helps you write (pen and paper, Word, etc). I wrote over a dozen books with pencil and paper because I didn't have a computer. Now I use Word. (But also dabbling with LibreOffice)
All I'd really say that matters is that an author writes however they're most comfortable (whether paper or computer. Plotting, pantsing, or a hybrid of both) and do their best to not stress on the "must-do" lists other authors put out. Because no two authors are exactly the same, just as no two projects that an author works on is exactly the same.
@@kanashiiookami6537 very well-put!
Omg it freaked me out as I was trying to log into campfire (I use the free version lol) bc I for some reason couldn't remember it, y'all MENTION CAMPFIRE!!!! I wasn't rlly listening and just heard that as I was scrolling on my phone for an old confirmation email, omg that scared me haha.
My personal take on it: I am a Google doc fanatic but because of piling all my ideas into one doc for the past few years, then trying to organize it at the end of the doc (which failed) using another two docs + campfire is low-key saving me rn as the organizing disaster that I am 😭. Like I wish on Google docs instead of bullet points it's drop downs. Thats like the main reason I like campfire as well as the many manyyy areas to type (too many tbh I don't need statistics and all that haha) but its really helpful for someone like me who can't remember what I decided on/doesn't have the ideas I have memorized as a full intertwined plot
I use Scrivener and for me it is quite intimidating. There is so much there that I get overwhelmed. I can't remember where to find all of the options and I spend so much time trying to find things like notes and scene cards and things like that that I lose a lot of writing time. Not that I don't like the software, I do, but I don't think I use it to the best of it's abilities.
precisely this! i know many writers who get so caught up in software and organisation that they never get to the writing, which is the only part that really matters
I've never quite understood the concept of being "stingy" with words. They aren't material things. They don't even take up paper anymore in the age of electronic media. The idea makes me sad. I love language and learning new words is such a treat for me when I'm reading. Give me all the interesting words, give me sentences that challenge me and complex metaphors. It's what makes reading engaging. I love when it makes my brain work.
I think you mean "be respectful of a reader's time", which I do agree with, but being stingy just has such a joyless ring to it, as if you resent the process of sharing words itself. There are plenty of "stingily-written" books out there that are flat out insulting to a reader's time. For me, austerity of words is a poor indicator of quality. Give me more, just make it interesting!
@@ContessaDark i like to think of it as knowing the right amount of words to use to get to a point or to the heart of a story. as an editor i often work with very overwritten manuscripts where a single point is drilled down on or repeated over and over again, when it could have been a lot more impactful if it was written about with fewer words. i have nothing against complex sentences, metaphors or interesting words. my point was more about the content behind those words. and i think its actually less about your reader’s time, but more about their ability to understand things. my editorial principle for this goes hand-in-hand with ‘show don’t tell,’ so that an author doesn’t come off as if they’re dumbing things down for their readers, or repeating information a reader already knows. hope that makes sense!
@@theplottery It does, though overwriting is different from over-explaining. There are concepts that just don't translate to people with access to everything (just try telling internet-raised generations that most of a country doesn't actually KNOW what the Prince looks like, just what a portrait looks like--if they were lucky enough to ever see one. It breaks their brains, but is a fundamental component of the "hidden royalty" trope.)
It depends what you're writing, of course, but I'm a "forest AND trees" reader. I enjoy granular detail as well as narrative distance which lets me recontextualize what I've been told so far. I appreciate an editor's eye, you all can truly save something great from the bin, but sometimes you all beat the fun and atmosphere out of things because "it's not necessary". Not necessary for anything other than delivering personality and flavour? And those decisions are all according to a template that is only the most recent iteration of styles that have changed again and again over decades; churned until it feels like a chicken and egg question, when the answer is always the Publisher's Mandate. A lot of buzz leaning to indie authors is because they take risks and challenge convention. It's not perfect, sometimes even a hot mess, but stands a better chance of surprising the reader. From that perspective, I'll take an overwritten risk any day before a groomed-into-mediocrity manuscript-- i.e. 90% of trad pub (pro-edited) YA fantasy. Those regurgitated, trope-bloat, snooze-fests are on *your* profession. Where's the gate-keeping everyone talks about for *that* stuff?
Sorry, that was rude, not every editor is like that, but you hit on a pet peeve of mine.
Maybe that industry-level failure is why my trust in editors has eroded so badly. (That might actually be a good topic for an episode, explaining editing trends, good and bad, and how so much uninspired stuff ends up on the shelves.) I guess, I'm just not seeing how editors are making books better (and if what's pushed out IS the better version ... God help us all.)
Still, very much appreciate what you do! It's not easy.
Keep up with the podcast! 💖
@@ContessaDark i appreciate that opinion, but i do have to clarify that neither jasmina nor i work for the traditional publishing industry, and indie books and authors still get editors (such as us) to polish up their manuscripts. I never-ever try to slash out anyone’s ideas or writing for the sake of convention, but for the sake of what’s best for their particular story and their particular vision. every editor has their own process and i think they come as unique as the authors. not all editors are going to try to change or groom a manuscript into something else. ive personally never had that experience with anyone who’s edited my work, nor have i done it (i hope) to others. and jasmina is actually a ghostwriter too, and tends to add on words to stories she really connects with. you also have to understand that its always up to the clients we work with whether they agree with and keep our suggestions, or stick to what they had before. i completely agree on how bad commercial fiction has gotten, and cannot believe my eyes when i see the bestseller’s list these days and the quality of the manuscripts that gets put out. and they’re all the same thing over and over again. i can usually tell you exactly what’s going to happen in a book from the first chapter. i recently read one such book for fun and felt like i lost braincells… ended up skimming to the end! i definitely would love to do a critical podcast on commercial fiction trends, but i just know there’s going to be many opinions on that 😂 maybe when we’re a bit more established.
@@theplottery Thank you for your patient and kind reply. I apologize if I came off as harsh or combative.
I have complete respect for the work ethic and adaptability that goes into being a free lance editor. It's a real nose-to-the-grindstone job. I do believe you that you listen to your clients and want to get the best out of their stories and my criticism wasn't fair to people like you or Jasmina.
I think, because so much CRAP gets onto shelves, my reflex on hearing someone is an editor is: "Yeah? Prove you're not ruining books!", because there are a whole hell of a lot of pro editors out there who are. Some of this also comes from there being so many self-dubbed-editor-overnight people who do nothing but parrot industry jargon-- the "rules" I believe are directly contributing to the lousy state of trad pub books, so when I hear it, my hackles go up. It's especially infuriating when I know people who've written GREAT books, but can't even get them looked at, yet we're inundated with "professionally treated" books that wouldn't be worthy of wiping their novel's ass. It's a real WTF? state for anyone who's even a mildly critical reader. It feels like you can't trust anything anymore; so I just go back to the authors I love and write the stuff I wish was on the shelves. 😥
Witchfinder is actually a historical name for witch hunters😅
oooooh the more you know!