I really hate my process. HATE IT. But it’s mine, so I’m stuck with it. My process…

Book Stew:

1) Take an idea
2) Butcher the idea
3) Rework the idea, toss it out, start over with new idea
4) Wonder why you ever though you could cook (write)
5) Add characters and stir. Still too flat, uninteresting?
6) Add conflict and tension
7) Taste—it’s flat, one-dimensional and BORING
Try a subplot to ratchet up the tension
9) Read a really good book like say BODY DOUBLE by Tess Gerritsen and realize that she did a masterful job of weaving subplots and the main plot. Time to add large dose of self doubt.
10) Rework subplot then realize you’re not Tess Gerritsen and go back to your original subplot.
11) Taste—better, but not full bodied enough (Fully Developed) Must be the lead characters
12) Rework characters, adding more dimension and motivation…
13) Pick up wooden spoon and smack myself in the head. Over and over. (By now, my husband has hidden all the sharp knives.)
14) Tell myself I can fix the stew, just keep cooking…uh…writing…what WHERE IS THE WINE?????
15) Throw in a sex scene. Someone needs to work off tension…and maybe the characters will start behaving if I let them have sex. Please God!
16) Keep stirring and simmering and working. More adjusting of characters, plot, pacing….
17) Suddenly, and I don’t have a freaking clue how it happened, but there’s a new scent in the air…it smells like Book Stew.
18) The book is finished. Husband still won’t return the sharp knives.

What does your recipe for Book Stew look like?

There are only two ways to write. Either put your fingers on a keyboard and type away, or pick up a pen and do it the old-fashioned way.

Now that you know how to write, you might ask why are there so many dang rules out there? That you have to plot (or not); that you can never change POV mid-scene (except sometimes); that you have to introduce your hero/heroine by page 32 (or the end of chapter one, or chapter five . . . )

We all have rules we like and follow (most of the time.) And because we all tend to be a little egotistical, we think that if people would just follow OUR rules, they’d be able to write a marketable novel.

Truth is, my rules work for me and they may (or may not) work for you. Or maybe Rules #4, 15, 37, 85 and 99 of the 100 “rules” I write by will work for you, but not the others.

The only way anyone can learn to write is to sit down and do it. You can spend years in writing classes, read a hundred craft books, but to write a book you simply have to sit down and start writing. Good or bad, it doesn’t matter when you first start. But following rules that may stifle your voice or inhibit you is frustrating.

Case in point: I love Donald Maass’s WRITING THE BREAKOUT NOVEL. It’s one of the few craft books I’ve read, and I’ve read it three times. I never read books three times. But the way he put together the information and his checklists after every chapter helped me visualize how my stories worked and where I might need to focus more energy.

So, I got his WRITING THE BREAKOUT NOVEL WORKBOOK. Argh!!!! What a waste of money. I absolutely got NOTHING from trying to make my novel and characters conform to his stupid questions. (But a good friend of mine loves the workbook and “didn’t get” first book.)

Who’s right? Me or my friend? Both! Why? Because the first book works for me, and the workbook works for her, and we’re both happy.

This isn’t to say that I agree with every single thing Maass said in his book. Under his chapter about Characters, for example, I absolutely agree with: “All stories are character driven.” I absolutely do not agree with: “Differentiate characters with character charts.” I wouldn’t know a character chart if it bit me on my derriere.

But, sometimes, in revisions, I get stuck and will skim his chapter checklists. I saw this comment: “Choose a narrator based on who is changed most by the story’s events.” This one line gave me an AHA! moment in revising THE KILL last year. I had a scene that just wasn’t working and my editor hated it. When I reviewed Maass’s checklist, I realized I had written the scene in the wrong POV. I switched it to the hero and voila! it worked.

Why do I hate the workbook? Oh, let me count the ways . . . one exercize, for example, about inner turning points has the writer pick a turning point and wind back the clock ten minutes to find out how the character feels about himself at the earlier moment, the at the moment, then after the turning point. Ugh! I write enough scenes that I end up deleting, I don’t want to do it on purpose. When would I have time to finish the damn book? BUT I can see the value in being able to look at your character at any point in the story, written or unwritten, on or off page, and know exactly what they’re thinking and feeling. I do it all the time. I just can’t stand the idea of wasting time writing it out.

The point in this rant is that we all know how to write–put your ass in the chair–but in the process, we need to find rules that work for us and make our stories stronger.

And don’t force them on anyone else.

What’s YOUR personal favorite writing “rule”? What’s the writing “rule” you can’t stand? Just pick one . . . no fair listing ten!

My favorite rule is: “Rules are meant to be broken.” My least favorite rule is: “You must not change POV mid-scene.”

PS . . . BSP time. I posted my large print covers on my personal blog if you want to check them out!

Okay, I’ll admit it. I love the hero’s journey. No, I don’t use it to plot my books. No, I don’t make sure that I have every step of the journey in my revisions.

What I love is when I finish a book and can see the hero’s journey seamlessly laid out, the layering of journey upon journey, intersecting at key points in the story. If I can’t see the journey after I’m done, I know I have some work to do. Why? Because the hero’s journey is part of our storytelling heritage, the nexus that unites all of us from a time when stories were handed down by word, to when they were written down for all.

I’ve espoused numerous times my belief that STORY IS CHARACTER. This week I’m doing my Vogler workshop for the East Texas RWA Chapter and in my summary post I said:

It is their choices, their backstory, their fears, their weaknesses and strengths, that propel the story forward, that drives the pacing.

Or, as Robert Gregory Browne said so much more succinctly:

Story is all about character reaction and action. The fuller the characters, the more believable and satisfying their action/reactions.

Since story is character, it’s all about what the characters DO and DON’T DO that make the story. Action and reaction.

One of my favorite steps of the hero’s journey is CROSSING THE THRESHOLD. This is the point of no return, where the hero is fully committed to the journey, where he completely leaves his ordinary world behind and embarks on the Road of Trials. Crossing the Threshold blends the first act with the second, and if done well will seem both seamless and poignant. It is a time of action.

** When Luke Skywalker sees his dead aunt and uncle and leaves Tatooine . . .
** When Neo swallows the red pill . . .
** When Dorothy takes the first step down the yellow brick road . . .

Everything leading up to that crescendo point has set the character to make a choice. A or B. Yes or No. Right or . . . the point is that the character willingly or unwillingly makes a decision that forever alters the course of his journey. They are fully committed to the adventure, warts and all.

Their actions have consequences that they must deal with. Even not doing something is an action, right? Standing on the sidelines has consequences, too.

One of the fatal flaws of unpublished writers is forgeting that every character in their book is on a journey. You don’t need page after page of narrative explaining this to the reader. By showing key elements of secondary characters that the reader–as part of the human race–can see and extrapolate other characteristics, we have created a well-rounded character using few words.

Take Pirates of the Caribbean. I’m working on adding the movie to my hero’s journey workshop because I think it expertly shows multiple journey’s and how they intersect and clash. (And, it gives me another excuse to watch the DVD again . . . but I digress.)

Yes, you have Elizabeth Swann and Will Turner and Jack Sparrow . . . each on their own journey that sometimes work together, and sometimes oppose each other. But then you have Barbarosa . . . the villain, the “shadow” who is seeking to reclaim his life. Remember his last words? “I . . . feel.”

You have the Commandore (okay, I know I spelled that wrong but I don’t write historicals) who at times is an enemy, and an ally, but is also on his own journey to protect the fleet and the fort and those under his colors. He takes his command seriously, has a strong sense of duty and honor, and while we know Elizabeth couldn’t possibly love him (I mean, over Orlando Bloom? I think not,) we see a strong noble streak at the end when he willingly lets her go to be with her true love.

But there’s nothing better than the point in the movie where you’ve fully commited YOURSELF to enjoying it. Ironically, it almost always comes at the same time the hero crosses the threshold. At the beginning, we watch, hoping to be entertained, but still a little reticient–we’ve been burned in the past by movies that have failed to deliver on their promises.

So we watch the beginning, a little distant from the action. We see the characters. Elizabeth Swann and Will Turner as children. The pirate’s medallion she takes from his neck. Okay, getting interesting . . . and Jack Sparrow arriving at the fort. Okay, getting better. It’s fun, it’s different, but you’re not fully commited . . . until when? When Elizabeth invokes the rule of parlay? When Will breaks Jack out of jail? When the Commandore goes after them? Aw . . . we have three crossings, three journeys all making irrevokable decisions.

What’s going to happen next?

And that is when you’re as committed to the journey as the hero and you can lose yourself in the movie . . . or a good book.

I remember one of the first questions my agent asked me when we were discussing representation was how many books I could write in a year. Her comment was that publishers really wanted at least one book every nine months. I told her that was definitely possible, and my goal was to eventually write four books a year.

My long term writing goal has always been to produce four books a year once all my kids are in school. (Wow, six-and-a-half hours of uninterrupted writing time . . . I can hardly wait!) Why?

Two reasons: First, I have so many ideas I want to write about that, if I only wrote those I’ve thought up in the last four years, I would be able to write four books a year for the next twelve years. Second, I want to make a living writing and writing a lot of books is the best way to do that.

I take my two favorite authors: JD Robb and Tess Gerritsen. JD Robb has two books out a year (okay, so she really has five or six books out a year, but I like the Robb books best so I’m just going to talk about those). Each book is fantastic. Each book gets better than the last. I eagerly await the next release. Tess Gerritsen has one book out a year. Each book is incredible. Each story is better than the last. I eagerly anticipate the next release.

The two writers have different processes. Nora Roberts sits down, disciplined, and writes every day for 8-10 hours. When she finishes one book, she starts another. It’s just the way she does it. She can’t change anymore than Tess Gerritsen can. The both deliver page-turning stories.

As the JD Robb books have progresses, the growth in each has slowed. The beginning of the series was a little rough, it found its stride and skyrocketed. Now, each book is better, but they read like a continuation . . . there is no “marked” growth. But does there need to be? When you hit your stride and the stories flow out, does a writer need to shake up something that works just because?

In Tess’s books, I’ve noticed she pairs them. Whether consciously or not, I found THE SURGEON and THE APPRENTICE a pair. THE SINNER and BODY DOUBLE another pair. I liked the first pair better. Did she “not grow” in the second pair? No. Her writing is as tight and focused as ever. But when VANISH came out, I found my favorite Tess book. In it she did something brilliant. Her first person present narrative interspersed with third person past was unusual in that the first person present was a story that had actually taken place in the past–backstory–interspersed with the present day story told in multiple viewpoints using third person past. It takes not only a talented writer to do something so bold and challenging, but someone who is stretching their pen, so to speak.

It comes down to comfort level. Some authors are comfortable producing more than one book a year; others would panic.

In addition, some authors “comfort” is produce the same/similar type of stories. Does that mean they’re not growing? Do they have to grow if they fill a need? I look at Debbie Macomber. She writes warm, happy, emotionally satisfying family stories. As long as the stories continue to resonate with her readers, and she’s bringing in new readers, then I would say she’s growing as an author.

Real growth is only possible by living. It’s our experiences that add depth to our novels. I am a more mature writer today than ten years ago. I hope that I’m a more mature writer ten years from now, with greater depth and a sharper writing talent than I have today. And the only way I can grow and improve and push the envelop is if I keep living … experience life and not be a hermit … and if I keep writing, one book or four books a year.

P.S. Come back tomorrow and read about our new contest!

Okay, we have a theme this week and my diversion is . . . I’m writing about something completely different. Which is really the story of my writing life. It took me years to get serious about my writing. Why? Because every time I started a story, I’d get 50-300 pages into it and then . . . get a better idea and start something new.

But I have a good reason for going off on a tangent today. Several authors and I were chatting on-line (okay, there’s MY biggest diversion from writing: the Internet. End of story. See, what a boring post that would be!) . . . anyway, these suspense authors and I were chatting about the difficulty of maintaining a high level of suspense WITH a believable, growing relationship. This balancing act becomes even more difficult when you’re writing a short time frame story–like, oh, 24 hours or so.

I love romantic suspense. I love writing it and reading it. To me, there’s nothing better than a dark, scary suspense book with a fantastic romance that ends in a happily-ever-after . . . the villain gets what’s coming to him, and the hero and heroine ride off together into the proverbial sunset.

Romantic suspense has grown into its own genre. It’s no longer simply a sub-genre of romance. The edges are blurred and romantic suspense has bled into other genres as well. There is erotic romantic suspense; paranormal romantic suspense; historical romantic suspense. And there are huge ranges from light to dark suspense, warm to hot romance. Anything goes, and I think that’s fantastic.

To put this in perspective, look at the fantabulous Nora Roberts. Her “Nora” romantic suspense (ala THE THREE FATES, DIVINE EVIL, etc) while definitely RS are more focused on the relationship. Her JD Robb books, while they definitely have a strong romance, are more focused on the suspense. Both tones are romantic suspense, but you have different levels of suspense.

On the romance side, you’ll find “warm” romances without explicit sex, and “hot” romances with lots of sex. There’s a place for both in the genre. To me, it’s what the story calls for.

For example, in THE PREY, multiple, detailed, hot sex scenes fit the story. In THE HUNT, there were two “warm” scenes between the hero and heroine. Because I put myself deeply into the characters, I couldn’t seem to write the scenes any more explicitly than they were, because it didn’t fit the characters. In THE KILL the scenes hit my hero’s rough-around-the-edges personality, and my heroine’s coming into her own sexuality.

You’ll also find not only different levels of suspense-to-romance, and heat within the romance, but different ranges of grittiness as well. I tend to write more gritty. Not AS dark or gritty as some of the straight suspense writers like Tess Gerritsen and Karin Slaughter, but grittier than what might be considered typical of the romantic suspense genre which is probably why I’m finding my books cross-shelved in romance AND mystery/suspense.

Balancing romance and suspense isn’t always easy. In THE PREY I didn’t have any problems–the story took place over a three week period. The relationship developed naturally, out of proximity and common interests and values. In THE HUNT, it was a reunion–I had a strong backstroy between the hero and heroine and because of that, I could go back and forth between then and now, showing how they first fell in love, what happened to split them apart, and how they found their way back together–all against the primary story of hunting for a killer.

The suspense must be believable. I spend a lot of time in my villain’s head because I want to know why he does what he does, I want to see him fully. No one is evil in a vacuum. They become evil, they may do evil things, but there’s a reason. The villain is the hero of his own journey, he can and will justify everything he does. His rise and fall is as important as the hero and heroine.

Balancing a page-turning suspense with a strong romantic relationship can be tricky. Like in THE KILL, I had to have a realistic time when my hero and heroine could acknowledge their attraction, then act on it. I think I found it, in the lull before the storm so-to-speak, but it took a couple of tries before I got it right.

In the end, though, romantic suspense authors write what they want to read. If they are true to their voice, they’ll be different than what is out there. We don’t need another Lisa Jackson or Linda Howard or Nora Roberts, because new authors will be pale imitations to the originals. We need a unique voice, and romantic suspense offers such a range of romance to suspense that there’s room for many strong voices.

The key is to write for the story, remembering first and foremost that “character is story” and if you’re going to be true to yourself, you’ll let your natural balance control your voice.

I write what I write because I love it. Some people may want more romance, some less, but in the end, if I’m going to be true to MY voice, I write what comes most naturally to me. Anything else will feel artificial. Not only to me, but to my readers.