What do great writers like to read?

Creative Commons

What makes a good read? Is it characterization, plot, style? A unique idea, or the rules of your favourite genre?

I’ve asked some of the best independent authors I know what they like to read — what makes a good read for them. Today, here are the first three to answer: 

• RS Guthrie, author of the Bobby Mac paranormal-thriller series and the James Pruett mystery series
• Karen Wodke, author of James Willlis Makes a Million and half of the Wodke Hawkinson writing duo, authors of Betrayed, Zeke, Sue, Tangerine and other books
• Scott Morgan, author of Stories My Evil Twin Made Up, Character Development from the Inside Out, and How to Be a Whiny Beeyotch: 71 Writing Excuses Meet the Back of My Hand

Name three characteristics of books that you like. What makes you keep reading a book? 

RS Guthrie: I personally love great, literary writing and deep characters. Of course, like everyone, my initial buy many times depends on the cover, or especially the first part of chapter one sampling. I usually know by one to three paragraphs in whether I will like the book. Actually, that's a pretty good indicator of the books I won't like. You can never know for sure about liking/loving a book until it ends; sometimes writers give up two-thirds of the way through and that's a HUGE disappointment you can't see coming.

Rob Guthrie

Karen Wodke: Three characteristics of books I like: 

• being drawn into the story right from the start

• when a story is handled in a unique way or deals with unusual material

• when a book is so well-written, it takes me away.

Scott Morgan: Good books need a strong storyteller's voice; to be true  to its internal universe; and to take chances. I don't want to read the same thing someone else wrote, I want to read a new idea, new way of seeing, new world.

What are some books that you weren't able to put down until you finished them? 

RS Guthrie: The last book I read I could not put down was Jonathan Lethem's Motherless Brooklyn. I can never put any of his books down. Gun, With Occasional Music rocked my world! Dissident Gardens is just out and I have not read it yet.

Karen Wodke: Sharp Objects by Gillian Flynn; The Mothers by Vardis Fisher (about the doomed Donner party crossing); Evening News by Marly Swick; The Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien; Life-Size by Jenefer Schute.

What other books have these characteristics?

RS Guthrie: Anything by James lee Burke. In fact, he's the master of melding both elements (literary style with great characters). All of John D. MacDonald's Travis McGee series (21 books). Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried, If I Die In A Combat Zone, and Going After Cacciato.

Karen Wodke: The books I mentioned are very different in style from each other. What they have in common is a compelling story. It would be impossible to list all the other books that share this characteristic. I like Dean Koontz, JA Konrath, earlier Stephen King, earlier James Patterson, Wally Lamb, Robert Heinlein, and a number of indie authors. The books I most enjoy reading share the following characteristics: interesting plot, descriptions that are appropriate to the story, a unique style of writing, and a steady pace.

Scott Morgan: All good books have these characteristics (a strong storyteller's voice; true  to its internal universe; and to take chances). Best examples for me are (fiction) Falling Angel by William Hjortsberg and (nonfiction) The Trouble with Tom by Paul Collins.

Scott Morgan

Do you consciously try to emulate these books? 

RS Guthrie: When I first read James Lee Burke's Dave Robicheaux series, I knew I had found my voice. Until then I kept flip-flopping between a more literary style versus deep, engaging characters and a lot of great dialogue (something you don't find in "literary" books). Burke showed me that the two can not only coexist but enhance each other and make for a compelling read. Primarily that affects my characters, dialogue, and definitely word choice. You need to be sparsely descriptive. Yes, describe the surrounding stage so the reader can smell it, see it, feel it, but don't take thirteen pages to do so. And dialogue, for me, is key. Good, engaging dialogue is the best way I know to show your character rather than tell him/her to the reader.

Karen Wodke: I don’t think I consciously try to emulate any other book. That said, a good book inspires me to work on improving particular elements in my own writing. For instance, reading Gillian Flynn has made me want to come up with

Karen Wodke

better similes and metaphors; she’s brilliant at both. She also has a very distinctive voice. A skill I admire in Stephen King is the ease with which he tells a story. Opening one of his books is like settling into a favorite chair. I admire the way Koontz pulls a reader in from the first page. And some thriller authors write such clean, tight plots; I can’t help but be impressed. There are important things to be learned from any well-written book.

You know what they say: easy reading is damn hard writing.

Scott Morgan: I try to emulate the writers more so than the books. writers like Brian Hodge always come up with incredible ways to tell stories that are not limited to single books. If I'm borrowing from books, it's usually inn how the writer constructs his/her universe with as little detail as possible. Great writers can put you in their heads but let you keep your own eyes.

Conveying emotion while avoiding cliché: Rachel Thompson on style

This edition of Written Words turns to Rachel Thompson, author of A Walk in the Snark, The Mancode: Exposed and most recently, Broken Pieces. She has graciously agreed to answer my pesky questions about writing style.

How would you describe your own writing style?

I've always been fascinated by writers who can express themselves with the least amount of words, yet still lyrically. That's why I'm such a fan of Hemingway. I tend to write in shorter sentences, with as few words as possible. 

You made a major shift between your first two books, The Mancode Exposed and A Walk in the Snark, and your third, Broken Pieces, in terms of subject matter and tone. Do you also think you wrote differently? Do you think your use of language changed?

The topics of male/female relationships are still there, and I'm still nonfiction, but yes, the tone is radically different. After writing the first two humor books, I found myself returning again and again to the childhood sexual abuse I experienced as a child and had never spoken or written about. It just seemed like it was time.

Are there any authors whose style you admire? Do you try to emulate them?

I hated Hemingway when I was younger, but very much appreciate his style now. I admire Hanuki Murakami immensely. John Irving and Pat Conroy also, for their ability to tell wonderful stories with rich characters. I'm enjoying more poetry now, especially by Dylan Thomas and Pablo Neruda. I enjoy David Sedaris very much. I'm also a huge advocate for women, and read as many female writers as I can. Those who influence me are Virginia Wolff, Lorrie Moore, Anne Rice's earlier works and Margaret Atwood — love her work. And indie authors like Christine Nolfi, Steena Holmes, and Terri Guiliano Long are extremely talented. 

Are there authors whose writing style you dislike?

It's interesting — I've attempted to read House of Leaves (by Mark Z. Danielewski) several times and just can't get through it. I'm very process-oriented and linear. That book is crazy. It's on my To Do list, though. :) 

How important is your writing style to you? Are you happy with your style, or are there aspects of it you try to change during rewriting or editing?

I do like my style. I find I work best with a loose structural outline (for example, “trust” or “love” as topics) and then I just let my mind go. It seems to work well with poetic structure in particular. I'm playing with sonnets right now. I tend to write in past tense more than I'd like. 

How can readers identify your writing style? Are there particular words or kinds of words that you tend to favour? Sentence structures? Or is it more in the story, the pacing or the characters?

As a nonfiction writer, I'm fascinated endlessly by the psychology of relationships, so I tend to use words that convey emotion, while avoiding clichés (e.g. heart, soul), which can be difficult! Avoiding cliché is a huge deal for me. With regard to pacing, in this past book I was struggling with the structure and how it lent itself to pacing. My brilliant editor, Jessica Swift, suggested I don't get mired in the structure while I was writing — rather, allow the pieces to go where they led me. This ended up working quite well and it's how we ended up structuring the book.

Meaning, it's not: essay, poem, prose; essay, poem, prose. It's whatever felt right for each section.

Do you think your audience responds to your writing style, consciously or unconsciously?

I do. We're taught to be chronological thinkers, but emotions don't conveniently fit into that neat little timeline. So with this book, I present it in pieces (as the title implies) so the reader will feel the same discomfort I did as I lived them. Even a 1-star review that complains about disliking the “disjointedness” of the book's structure is a win for me since that’s exactly what I wanted.

How important do you think writing style is to an author's commercial success?

I wish I had an easy answer. I had no idea people would respond to this book the way they have. Sometimes I read a NYTimes bestseller and think, “really?” So I suppose my answer is that yes, style does contribute, but we as authors also have to connect with readers at an emotional level for the work to resonate.

Where do you see yourself going creatively next? Tell us about your work in progress. What can your readers expect from RachelintheOC?

My social media book for authors (Let's Deconstruct! is the tentative title) is with my editor. We should be done with that process by October and I hope to release in November. I've started writing the next in the Broken series, titled Broken Places. I was hoping to release by December but we shall see — I'm thinking more spring of next year at this point. I don't want to rush it. And I recently signed with Booktrope to create the print version of Broken Pieces. That should be out in October or November also. 

Thanks, Rachel in the oh-see!

Thank you!

Rachel Thompson (aka RachelintheOC) is a bestselling author and social media/author marketing consultant. She is a founding member of the BestSelling Reads association of writers of new fiction.

Her three books, A Walk In The Snark, The Mancode: Exposed and Broken Pieces are all #1 Kindle bestsellers and garner five-star reviews from fans and professional reviewers alike.

When not writing, she helps authors and other professionals with branding and social media through her company, BadRedhead Media. Her articles appear regularly in the San Francisco Book Review (BadRedhead Says…), 12Most.com, bitrebels.com, and BookPromotion.com.

While she did live in “the OC” — Orange County, California, Rachel and family moved to Northern California in 2012 to be closer to family and friends — but really, because her family was tired of her burnt food and Rachel’s mom is a great cook.

She hates walks in the rain, running out of coffee, and coconut.

Find Rachel Thompson online: 

Email RachelintheOC(at)gmail.com
Website: rachelintheoc.com
Consulting company: BadRedhead Media 

Facebook 

Rachelintheoc Thompson  FacebookBroken Pieces Fan Page 

Twitter 

Rachel: @RachelintheOC

Business: @BadRedheadMedia

LinkedIn

Goodreads  

Christine Nolfi: a professional writer confident about her style

In my pursuit of the meaning and importance of writing style, this week I am turning to veteran Christine Nolfi, best-selling author of Second-Chance Grill, The Tree of Everlasting Knowledge and Treasure Me. Christine is also a founder of BestSelling Reads, a cooperative promotional group of writers of "new fiction."

Christine has definite views on the writer's style.

How would you describe your own writing style?

A combination of short, staccato sentences blended with longer, closer-to-literary passages. The combination is wholly intentional, a surefire way to evoke emotion in the reader.

Are there any authors whose style you admire? Do you try to emulate them?

I’m particularly fond of Ann Patchett’s style, but I don’t emulate her or other authors. I’ve been writing for many years. My literary voice is well established.

Are there authors whose writing style you dislike?

I dislike any prose that’s choppy, disjointed or poorly edited.

How important is your writing style to you? Are you happy with your style, or are there aspects of it you try to change during rewriting or editing?

After years of study, trial and error, critique groups, literary agents and much revision, I’m very happy with my writing style. Now when I sit down to begin a story, the entire process feels organic.

What are the important elements of your style? What are you trying to achieve?

An author receives the incalculable gift of the reader’s attention. Add in the modern world, with all the distractions and thrills of mass media, television, film — even the texting feature on your cell phone. Given all of that, I strive to create visual images on every page. Conflict rises, chapter by chapter. And I never forget to pack emotion into every sentence, and the novel’s essential structure.

Your style uses a lot of dialogue. What do you do to ensure your writing is authentic and believable?

I rehearse each scene out loud, becoming the different characters at different turns. This used to frighten my children. They’d arrive home from school to find Mom staring at the Mac and babbling dialogue. Now they’re grown and take my eccentricities in stride.

How can readers identify your writing style? Are there particular words or kinds of words that you tend to favor? Sentence structures? Or is it more in the story, the pacing or the characters?

I suspect readers first recognize my characters as something arising from Nolfi novel. Then the dialogue, which can veer from comedic to poignant in the blink of an eye. Writing style? The combination of short sentences and long passages are a dead giveaway.

Do you think your genre imposes certain restrictions on writing style?

Not at all. I write contemporary fiction, which covers the gamut of human experience. No, you’ll never find horror or erotica in my books. But you will find elements from many other genres — romance, mystery and suspense especially.

Do you think your audience responds to your writing style, consciously or unconsciously?


If fan mail carries proof, I’m sure of it. No doubt the response is both conscious and subconscious.

Why did you add discussion questions to the end of Second Chance Grill? Is this something you do with other books?

Book clubs welcome ready-made questions and I’ll probably supply them in each new release. The Tree of Everlasting Knowledge also has a discussion section. I’ll tell you, devising the right mix of questions for each book was arduous. I worried about missing important issues, or placing too much emphasis on others.

How important do you think writing style is to an author's commercial success?

I think readers in every genre have certain expectations. As an author, you must meet those expectations for any hope of success. In the case of contemporary fiction, readers demand a writing style rich in emotion, with striking visuals and deep symbolism. They don’t want a surface read. If they aren’t quickly immersed in the story and the conflict, they’ll move on to another novel.

Do you think your style will change in the future? Is there something different you would like to do in terms of style in a future book?

With each new book written, I sense my style veering closer to literary. Readers will decide if I’m making a wise decision. Someday I would like to try my hand at something different — a fantasy, perhaps, or science fiction. Or something gritty. Presently I’m editing my next two contemporary fiction releases, and will write the third installment of the Liberty Series over the summer. Perhaps I’ll find time in 2014 to try something new.

Christine Nolfi owned a small public relations firm in Cleveland, Ohio. She closed the firm after traveling to the Philippines to adopt a sibling group of four children. She has been writing novels full-time since 2004. Her debut Treasure Me is a 2012 Next Generation Indie Awards finalist. Her most recent book, Second Chance Grill was released in October 2012. Her works continue to earn high marks on GoodReads and Amazon.

You can find out more about Christine, her books and her blog at www.christinenolfi.com.

Follow Christine on Twitter @christinenolfi

Check out her GoodReads Author Page, her FaceBook Author page, and her Amazon Author page.

And don't forget to check out her books!

Second Chance Grill:
on Amazon.com 
on Amazon.ca
at Barnes & Noble
on GoodReads.

Treasure Me — 2012 Next Generation Indie Awards Finalist
on Amazon 
at Barnes & Noble

The Tree of Everlasting Knowledge
on Amazon.com
on Amazon UK
on Barnes & Noble

Writing Tip: The Sentence, Part 1



Brain structure: emw/Creative Commons

 Lately, I’ve been reading a lot of work that shows severe problems with sentence structure. Whether in fiction or non-fiction, it’s almost as if the writers do not understand what a sentence is.

For example:

An analysis of survey results conducted by GHI concluded that different groups of consumers face different kinds of challenges, this includes unemployed and underemployed as well as low-income groups.

 Or the opposite problem, exemplified in this case in fiction:

The chattering of Will’s teeth, as loud as the cold north wind that blew down through mountains.

The problem in the first case is a comma splice: joining two separate sentences with a comma, rather than separating them with a period (or maybe a semi-colon).

Freeimages.co.uk

In the second example, the problem is an incomplete sentence. Something is missing — a verb. This is how a grammatically complete sentence would read:

The chattering of Will’s teeth was as loud as the cold north wind that blew down through mountains.

That’s not a particularly creative solution, but it’s correct.

Another example, with some light surgery to hide the actual source:

But back to the economy, all three projects expanded simultaneously and required capitalization, no wonder the organization’s bottom line was depleted.

The unit of expression

Think of the sentence as your basic unit of expression. A word may be a unit of meaning, but a single word by itself does not usually express an idea.


Back when I was in grade school, after cleaning the sabre-tooth tigers’ litter boxes, we all learned that a sentence expressed a single complete thought. To do that, it needs two elements: a verb or predicate — action — and a subject, which is usually a noun or a pronoun.

Creative Commons

The quick red fox jumps.

The action word, the verb, is “jumps.” “Fox,” of course, is the subject. The rest of the words describe the subject.

Sometimes, you don’t need the subject to be written out: “Duck!” The subject is “you, implied” — a concept that caused all sorts of confusion when I was in school.

That’s it: noun and verb. Other words just describe the subject or complete the action. End it with a period.

A wave of lust slammed into her body.

Just “lust slammed” would be a grammatically complete sentence.

The subject can also be a phrase or a clause: a group of words that function together as a noun.

Resisting the temptation to crush her body against his and tear off her clothes took all his willpower.

The subject in that example did not end until after “clothes.” (And “after clothes” is one of my favourite places.)

That’s all there is to it. To write clearly, write about something doing something.

Joining complete thoughts

To join two complete thoughts — sentences — you have to have the right kind of link. Usually, it’s not a period, but a word or a group of words. I won’t go into the formal grammatical expression here; if you read good writing, you’ll develop a sense of what “sounds” right.

Here are some examples of what not to do, and corrections. Again, these are taken from real sources, but doctored slightly so as to keep the guilty hidden until they can redeem their sins.

Run-on sentence

The run-on sentence happens when one complete idea follows another without any punctuation or joining phrases.

Image Wikipedia Commons

She got up and went into the bathroom and got a wet washrag and came back and laid it across her mother’s forehead.

There are more than one problem with this example. The succession of clauses joined by “and,” while grammatically correct, gets tedious. There’s also way too much detail. You don’t need to describe every single action: your reader can figure out the intervening actions.

She wet a rag in the bathroom and laid it across her mother’s forehead.

Not that I minded I can curse with the best of them, as you’ve probably noticed.

Not that I minded; I can curse with the best of them, as you’ve probably noticed.

Comma splice

Another common error is joining two related sentences with a comma instead of a semi-colon.

She took his hand again, “how are we going to keep them safe?” She whispered.

Again, there are more than one problem here:

She took his hand again. “How are we going to keep them safe?” she whispered.

“If we move quickly we could be off in front of the soldiers, we’ve got fast horses and money.”

“If we move quickly we could get ahead of the soldiers — we’ve got fast horses and money.”

“The horses need to rest tonight, so do we.” Gianni replied.

“The horses need to rest tonight, and so do we,” Gianni replied.
 

A matter of style?

Wikipedia Commons

Who cares, though? As long as the underlying meaning comes across, does grammar really matter?

Yes. First of all, using grammar correctly, especially such a basic concept as understanding what a complete sentence is, is a necessary but not sufficient indicator of professionalism. Whether you’re writing fiction, advertising or technical reports, if you don’t come across as professional, no one will take your document seriously. And if the audience doesn’t believe you, why bother writing?

Clarity is even more important. Consider this:

For hospitals seeking increased profitability in the operating room (OR) it is essential to streamline the movement of materials from suppliers to the hands of doctors efficiently acquiring and moving supplies critical to OR procedures are measurable ways to reduce costs, increase revenue capture, optimize labour and improve process management.

What’s efficient: doctors’ hands, or moving supplies?

When the subject is medical care, I think clarity is pretty darn important.

What do you think? Having trouble with sentences? Ask a question or leave a comment!