. . . I’m not talking about your children!

There’s a phrase writers use in the revision process: Kill Your Darlings. That a descriptive paragraph or scene, no matter how well-written or poignant or suspenseful or romantic or just plain stunning . . . if it doesn’t fit in the story . . . if it can be taken out without changing anything . . . has to go.

Kill it.

It’s the hardest thing a writer can do.

Because killing your darlings goes well beyond a well-turned phrase that may be repetitive, or a scene that is unnecessary. Sometimes in the slash and burn process of editing, characters need to go. And I don’t mean just killing them off in the middle of the book. I mean editing them out of the book completely.

Somehow, editing a character into nothing–completely erasing them–seems so much worse than murder.

I’m wrapping up my final round of revisions for LOVE ME TO DEATH, my January 2011 book starring Lucy Kincaid. Last night I had two major story decisions to make. The first was a series of scenes related to a character that my hero, Sean Rogan, has a confrontation with who subsequently ends up dead. The confrontation scene was fabulous–I loved the scene because it showed Sean being a hard-ass, and because Sean is a bit of a playboy and charming and always in a good humor, I wanted to show him being tough when it was warranted. And there was some great dialogue, too, a great back-and-forth that doesn’t always come easy to me. Then there was the discovering the dead body scene and being interrupted by the FBI. I really enjoyed the back-and-forth between Sean and FBI Agent Noah Armstrong as they butted heads, and then Lucy’s conflict of being in the middle of a crime scene while in the long FBI application process.

But . . . these scenes took up over thirty pages and while well-written and good, they didn’t truly advance the plot. There was no specific reason that Sean needed to talk to the dead guy before he was killed–he didn’t learn anything specific; and in fact, storywise, the guy needed to be long dead before Sean found him.

So . . . I cut all those scenes. And in cutting such a big chunk, I had to edit other scenes that were affected. But nothing changed storywise, and the revelations near the end of the book as Sean and Noah continue their parallel investigations (Sean is a private investigator) make so much more sense now! It’s as if subconsciously, I knew that these scenes weren’t necessary.

Sometimes, we don’t kill our darlings. One scene my editor identified that she felt didn’t advance the suspense plot enough, I decided to keep. I rarely disagree with my editor. In fact, I think the last time I kept an entire scene that she didn’t think was necessary was in THE KILL. But I understood what she meant, so I whittled the scene down a bit, and changed the lead-in to heighten the suspense even though the scene itself is not very suspenseful. But what it reveals about both my characters is, in my opinion, the best way to show the readers who Sean and Lucy are.

But . . . the book isn’t printed yet. The scene may end up on the cutting room floor.

I’ve had to get rid of characters, too. Take Max Revere, a true crime writer who was supposed to be a major character in ORIGINAL SIN. I love Max so much I even bought the URL of his name so he could blog. (I’m not kidding!) I wrote him into the first draft, and my editor told me that she didn’t feel he contributed enough to the story. But I was determined to make him work because I Really Like Max. So I spent a lot of time reworking the story so he had a bigger, more pivotal role. And sent the revisions in, and my editor said he didn’t have a pivotal role, and that he detracted from the story. Reluctantly, very reluctantly, I edited him out of the story. When she read the final version, she said, “I know you don’t want to hear this, but Max was removed easily.” And he was. I’d spent so much time working on his scenes that he wasn’t integral to any part of the story. Just one more character in a large cast of characters.

I argued about it. I tried to convince her that Max was essential. That he was important. That I couldn’t cut him out with messing up the story. But she was right and I was wrong. He wasn’t missed, except by yours truly.

But I was determined to write him into CARNAL SIN. And I did–he had three scenes. They are fantastic scenes. He’s smart and shrewd and intensely loyal–and he doesn’t believe in anything supernatural. He’s also a flirt, in a quiet, soulful eyes kind of way. He just has to look at you and you melt. And he has an agenda, and you know it, and even though you know he’s not all one-hundred-percent good, you’re willing to go along with him because he draws you in in his search for the truth.

And my editor said that he didn’t contribute to the story. I didn’t even argue this time, because she was right, and I knew she was right even as I wrote the scenes. But I wrote them almost defiantly because dammit, I wanted to prove that he was important!

And now he ceases to exist, except in my mind.

Max Revere will be re-born, just not in the Seven Deadly Sins series. Because I had an epiphany the other day. Max doesn’t fit in a supernatural story. He needs to be the lead character in his own story. He’s too strong a character to be secondary to anyone. I’d had a couple ideas over the years, and when I read a snippet of something completely unrelated in a publishing e-newsletter, Max just clicked into place. I have his backstory, I have his first (and maybe only) book, and I have the set-up. It just . . . works.

So not every darling killed will be gone forever. While most of the scenes and snippets I cut from my book during the revision process I’ll never use again, they often give me ideas for future stories. Cutting doesn’t bother me. I’ll slash and burn my manuscript if that’s what it takes to make the story the best I can make it. I love the revision process, even when I have to make the very difficult decision to excise a paragraph, a scene, or even a character, out of my book.

Now for a blatant piece of self-promotion . . . CARNAL SIN will be released on Tuesday, June 22! Yes, book two of the Seven Deadly Sins series is almost here. As regular visitors to MSW know, I loved writing these books. I needed to take a break from romantic thrillers, and writing two supernatural thrillers with a large cast of characters in a classic battle of good versus evil gave me what I needed to reignite my love for writing. I am particularly pleased with the blend of police procedure and the supernatural in CARNAL SIN. (For my fans in Australia, CARNAL SIN will be released down under on July 1.)

RT Book Reviews gave CARNAL SIN four-and-a-half stars and said: “Carnal Sin kicks butt!”

The weekly book buzz at Mania said in their review of ORIGINAL SIN: “Original Sin is yet another new series that is definitely more promising. Original Sin is much more grounded in the supernatural and mystery elements and other books of the same ilk. . . . Brennan masterfully builds suspense and horror in this genre-bending story. . . . All in all this was a strong start to this new series and one I’d recommend.”

I’m giving away a copy of CARNAL SIN. The winner will be announced this weekend. And if you don’t win? You can buy CARNAL SIN pretty much anywhere books are sold come Tuesday . . . or pre-order from Amazon, BN, Borders, or wherever you liked to shop! (Note to last winner of CARNAL SIN–I just got my books in, so yours is going out tomorrow!!)

Come out of lurkdom just to say ‘hi’ . . . or tell me what actor and/or actress you picture in the roles of Moira O’Donnell, Rafe Cooper, Anthony Zaccardi and Sheriff Skye McPherson . . . just for fun

Here’s one idea for Max Revere . . .

©2010 Murder She Writes. All Rights Reserved.

7  2  9  8    25

My first Lucy Kincaid book will be released in October of 2010 and I turned in the proposal three weeks ago. Lucy Kincaid is a character from my NO EVIL series. In FEAR NO EVIL, she was kidnapped before her high school graduation by a man she met on the Internet. She’d met him through a group she believed was only Georgetown students and prospective students as she prepared for college, thinking he was a freshman. He gave her a false name and false picture. She gave him a real name and real picture. Hence, he had no problem snatching her in the parking lot of Starbucks because he knew exactly what she looked like–and she had no idea who he was.

Lucy is one of my all-time favorite characters, and as soon as I finished writing FEAR NO EVIL I knew that I would someday write her story. Not only did I want to write her story, but I had many story ideas for her. When I came up for contract this Spring, I wrote a proposal for a Rogan-Caruso trilogy. Rogan-Caruso Protective Services was introduced in PLAYING DEAD as the employer of my heroine. I thought my publisher wanted another trilogy. They didn’t. I was kind of stunned–but they asked what else I had. The only other thing I wanted to write–in fact, the series that I preferred to write, but didn’t think they’d go for it–was Lucy Kincaid. They wanted it.

I was thrilled. I’m aging Lucy for the series–if I followed real time, she’d be twenty-one. In Book One, tentative titled NO WAY OUT, she’ll be twenty-four. Still younger than most heroines, but since this is a series, this gives me room to grow her. She’ll age in real-time, or close to it, after that and if the series is successful, I’ll probably limit it anyway. I love series, but like television, I think some should have ended at a peak before they crashed and burned. X-Files anyone?

But for Lucy, I have several story ideas. Patrick Kincaid, her brother who was injured and in a coma at the end of FEAR NO EVIL, woke up after twenty-two months in SUDDEN DEATH. I probably shouldn’t have used real time for his coma–twenty-two months is an unusually long time to recover from a coma!–but Jack needed the time for his internal journey. Anyway, I adore Patrick. And my mom threatened to disown me if I killed him, so he’s alive and breathing. I have story ideas for him, too–yes, IDEAS. I would love to alternate books between Lucy and Patrick, ala how Tess Gerritsen handles Maura Isles and Jane Rizzoli. They are both in every book, but usually one is more important to the story than the other. I love that, and that’s how I picture Lucy and Patrick.

In NO WAY OUT, Lucy is waiting to hear if she was accepted into the FBI Academy. She’s living in Georgetown with her older brother, Dillon, who is quietly over-protective, and Dillon’s girlfriend (possibly wife–I haven’t quite thought all this through yet!) Kate Donovan. She’s working somewhere–not sure where yet, either at a police department or lab–while she waits. The wait can last twelve months to two years. It’s long and stressful. Once you’re accepted, you’re given a report-to date for Quantico. It can be months away–but you’re still a hired employee. At that point, you work at headquarters but aren’t yet an agent.

When I was in Washington last week with the FBI Citizens Academy, our last tour was of NCMEC–the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, co-founded by John Walsh. Though I was familiar with the organization, I didn’t know exactly what they did. Five stories in a building in beautiful downtown Alexandria, Virginia dedicated to solving hundreds of thousands of cases of child exploitation. Honestly, I left depressed. Every day their staff goes in and tracks missing kids. They view child pornography hoping to identify the child or the location. Hoping to pick up clues as to who the predator is. They have a forensic anthropologist on staff who helps identify skeletons. They have computer experts who age photos to show us what a kidnapped or endangered child might look like today. They have many success stories, but far more tragedies.

They also collect a mass of data on missing children and predators. They work with all states and many international agencies to help track sex offenders who are supposed to register. They can go into public databases, they maintain their own database, and they can cross-reference information. There are many law enforcement on staff from many federal agencies including the FBI and ICE who are assigned to NCMEC. They are the case managers–they have the experience as well as arrest powers.

I couldn’t possibly detail everything NCMEC does to help protect children, from proactive measures like parent education to investigating crimes, but it is a difficult job for anyone there. In addition to law enforcement, they have case analysts and many others who work tirelessly. Some analysts spend most of their time analyzing photos for example–photos or videos that are of child pornography. They do it to find a clue–like the success story where they enhanced a photo well enough to detect a diploma on the wall. They couldn’t read the name because it wasn’t complete, but they were able to figure out what college it came from and eventually, though an extensive process, learned that the photo was taken in the office of an elementary school principal. He was arrested.

I went on the trip to Washington with my FBI group primarily to tour Quantico for my Lucy books–and that was terrific. NCMEC was added long after I signed up. It affected me far more than any other portion of the trip. But I don’t believe in ignorance. Too many of us don’t want to look at the truth and ignoring it won’t make it go away. While finding out more about NCMEC was difficult, not only am I immensely proud of them, I’m also better informed. If everyone understood the real dangers out there–and some of the activities that lead to the dangers both for victims and predators–maybe we could slow, or decrease, the number of child sexual predators.

I began to think . . . what if someone with a long and decorated career just . . . snapped? Wanted to take matters into his own hands?

While I know the set-up of NO WAY OUT–and have since the spring of 2008 when I took the FBI Citizens Academy classes and one thing that some said sparked the whole idea–I didn’t understand motivations. Suddenly, everything was clear, like putting on new glasses.

Comment–say hi, talk about what you like and dislike about series characters or stories, ask questions about my trip, anything!–and three people will win a copy of FEAR NO EVIL where Lucy was first introduced. FEAR NO EVIL won the Daphne du Maurier award for Best Mainstream Mystery/Suspense.

©2010 Murder She Writes. All Rights Reserved.

1  1

It’s a tough job, but somebody’s got to do it.

That’s right: role play with SWAT.

Sure, I know, it’s a day away from writing, a day away from the kids, a day away from email, but somebody has to make the sacrifice, and because I wouldn’t want to force this on anyone else, I stepped up to the plate.

I volunteered to be a victim. Yes this is my foot.

Ouch

This was my second role playing adventure. About five weeks ago, I participated in a tactical training as a “bad guy”–or, more accurately, as the white trash wife of a drunk pedophile who was harboring his cousin the pimp and the pimp’s underage girlfriend in the house. I learned a lot from the day–and even picked up the term “Mental Muscle” from my new pal in the Air Force, Tyler, who played “Billy” the pimp. It’s a phrase I’ve already used in ORIGINAL SIN, I loved it that much. (Basically, you practice and drill and run exercises until you can do it right the first time, on “instinct” and without hesitation.)

Yesterday’s drill was far more extensive than my first time. And for me, as a writer, it was even more valuable than the first.

Descending upon the former McClellan Air Force Base in Sacramento, California were seventeen SWAT teams from local law enforcement in Northern California. Run by the FBI and supervised by FBI SWAT Leader (and all around great guy) Brian Jones and run by the joint task force. (I believe this because the SWAT officers supervising the drills were from both the FBI and other law enforcement. But however they did it, it was very well orchestrated.) The teams were there for extra training, and could pick four of eight realistic scenarios (such as a sniper, officer down, and my drill–a school shooting.)

Just to set the stage: there were 250 SWAT guys in 17 teams, plus about 30 running the drills and 20 of us as “role players.” Role players come from interns in law enforcement, students in criminal justice classes, and people like me, graduates of the FBI citizens academy.

My scenario was a school shooting. I was a non-ambulatory but stable victim. Others had more serious injuries, or less serious injuries. The purpose of the drill was to put SWAT in a real-life, real-time situation (without real ammunition–they use paint pellets, but they hurt I’ve been told!) in order to train with “real” victims. One trainer said that role players are invaluable because when they run situations like this with just a shooter, once the shooter is down, they’re done. In real life, there is far more going on–clearing the scene, triage, civilian panic, etc. So the drill was two part–secure the scene, then deal with the victims until EMT arrives. SWAT is not extensively trained in triage, though many SWAT members are former military or have some basic medic experience. But handling a downed soldier is far different than a panicked civilian.

We were staged at various positions throughout the “school.” There were serious (abdomen) injuries and less serious injuries. And my pal Larry had a small “boo-boo” on his face that he declared loudly and often was bleeding and he needed medical attention now. I was placed in a doorway where I had a visual of a girl being “gunned down” as SWAT rounded the corner. I was told to scream until I was hoarse, and that if anyone touched my injured leg I was to scream in pain. Only two SWAT teams of the six actually touched the wound (and yes, I did scream in “pain.”)

As a side note, every SWAT team is a bit different in how they approach the scene and, for my purposes, how they handled triage. Two teams actually bandaged my GSW in the field with gauze and tape. One put a tourniquet around my thigh, but didn’t touch the wound itself (so I didn’t scream at him.) Two teams had me put pressure on my wound with my hand. One got me up quickly and into a staging room within the “school” (as opposed to the medic staging area outside the “school”) and had me sit until everyone with more serious injuries were dealt with. Of the six teams, two secured a room for victims, and four took the victims from the scene starting with ambulatory, then moving to non-ambulatory–most serious injuries first.

Triage after area is secure

Okay, another aside–hands down, if you’re ever held hostage in Northern California, you want Citrus Heights SWAT to be in charge of your rescue. Though I was the last victim to be removed from the scene, it was the smartest move (in my opinion) because I had a non-lethal injury. They were fast, they knew what they were doing, and they WERE IN CHARGE. They did not hesitate, they lit the shooter up, they quickly cleared the rooms (ALL the rooms) and assessed injuries without debate. Kudos to them! (All the teams did well, but this one just stood out head and shoulders above the rest. The last team that did the drill was above average as well, but I don’t remember who they were. It was late.)

How does playing these games help me as a writer? I know it’s not real, so while I’m excited and have a shot of adrenaline when gunfire ensues, it’s hard for me to know exactly how I would react in a real situation because my mind knows it’s not real. The only hint of what I’d really do (if I wasn’t given a verbal “script” to follow) would be to hide. When the first gunshot rang out, my instant reaction was to crawl into the room I was blocking and curl up in the corner. Make yourself a small target. But then I thought, what if someone I loved was injured? I think back to my oldest daughter’s surgery when she was two and I realize I would probably do what I did then–be a big girl, calm, collected, in charge, and then when I knew she was okay, break down in tears.

But the point is, everyone reacts different to the stimulus–not only the victims (some compliant, some panicked; minor injuries and major injuries)–but the SWAT teams. As a writer, the most valuable part of the exercise was not the scenario itself (though that was the most fun and the most exciting!) but the walk-through. After the drill, the trainers walk through with the team and ask them what they were thinking, why they did this or that, how they decided which formation or tactic to use, etc. As a role-player, I got to listen in to the conversations and heard first hand what they were thinking and why they did what they did. What’s running through their mind has me thinking what runs through the minds of my characters when placed in hostile or dangerous situations. These are trained cops–they are not idiots. They know what they’re doing. But sometimes they hesitate because of things we might not think about.

Such as liability. Two of the teams mentioned liability as a point of hesitation in firing upon the shooter. Because if he survives, he may sue. And if he doesn’t survive, his next of kin may sue.

I really had to think about that. I asked about it, and one true story that emerged related to an EMT unit. They were sued because they didn’t tend to a severely injured suspect during a shooting–where the scene was still hot–and instead tended to a downed officer. The suspect died and the next of kin sued saying the EMT should have treated them on scene. Fortunately, the case was dismissed because the code says that if a suspect has not been searched and cuffed, EMT are not required to give medical attention. And because the scene was hot (meaning there were still bad guys out there) there was no way for law enforcement to get to the suspect, search and secure him, and get him to the EMT in a safe zone. Considering that a bad guy might have a gun, might take a hostage, and was seen shooting a cop . . . well, the rule makes sense.

There are a lot of gray areas. Do you shoot a guy who’s holding a gun to his head? Do you leave the wounded in order to secure a scene? When do you shoot and when do you hesitate? SWAT is trained extensively on knowing how to identify the bad guys, but today one civilian was shot (grazed) because he pulled out his cell phone as SWAT came through the main doors.

We all know cops who are assholes. Who wear authority like a right to be worshipped. Some should be forced to resign because they give the majority of good cops a bad name. But watching them in action you realize that the choices they face on a daily basis might give them the right to a little bravado. They face life and death choices every day. In traffic stops that far too often go bad. In school shootings where they are facing victims and shooters who could be the same age as their own children. In robberies, car jackings, break-ins, kidnappings, rapes and murders. They’re the ones who tell a mother her son was killed; they’re the ones who step into a hostile domestic violence situation to try to diffuse it; they’re the ones who usually are first on scene at an accident or murder. They are not only responsible to keep themselves alive, but their partner. Not just their partner, but other cops. Not just other cops, but innocent by-standers. The rights of criminals are–rightfully–protected by our Constitution. But cops deserve the same rights and consideration as the bad guys. And, frankly, a little bit more. They’re putting themselves on the front lines to protect people like us, to protect our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And in doing that, many are shot, killed, disabled. So I’ve cut them a little slack when I see the attitude, because honestly? They deserve it.

Next up, I’m going to Quantico in September. I could tell you it’s research for the Lucy Kincaid series (which it is) but I had the trip planned before I sold the series, so it’s also because I think it’s going to be a blast. I can hardly wait!

Now, to be perfectly selfish . . . CUTTING EDGE went on sale this week. This is the third book in my FBI Trilogy and the spark of the idea came from the domestic terrorism presentation during the FBI Citizens Academy. A special agent discussed a case he worked where there was an FBI informant in a domestic terrorist cell (eco-terrorism) and his respect and admiration for the informant really hit me. It got me wondering why would someone become an informant? Who are they? What do they grow up to do? Who do they become? How does it affect them . . . not just being an informant, but betraying people they know and care about? What, if any, life-long repercussions are there? And asking myself those questions, I came up with Special Agent Nora English.

©2010 Murder She Writes. All Rights Reserved.

2  2

I love my agent and think she’s the greatest thing since the discovery that grapes can ferment into wine, but she doesn’t have a blog and I love agent blogs. I regularly visit Kristin Nelson at Pub Rants and Nathan Bransford and on occasion BookEnds and a few others.

A few weeks ago, Curtis Brown agent Nathan Bransford solicited queries from both published and unpublished authors. On a whim (or a completely idiotic moment) I sent him the query I’d sent my agent Kim Whalen in December of 2003, for THE COPYCAT KILLER.

For those who knew me then (Karin) know that THE COPYCAT KILLER was my title for the book that eventually became THE PREY. It was my fifth completed manuscript and I felt that the book had “it” — whatever “it” is. I couldn’t define it, I just sensed that this was the book I would sell.

In hindsight, I think I figured out why it worked for my agent and the editor who bought it, but that’s another blog for another time . . . but at the time I sent the query, I just had the feeling. Can’t explain why.

So you don’t have to click through to read my letter, here it is:

Dear Agent for a Day:

I have been seriously writing for nearly two years and am a finalist in fourteen RWA contests with twelve different books, including second place in the Daphne du Maurier Single Title category. THE COPYCAT KILLER ranked second in the Golden Opportunity contest. I’m a member of the Sacramento Valley, Kiss of Death and FF&P Chapters of RWA, and earned my PRO pin.

Why do some children grow up evil? That is the timeless question addressed in THE COPYCAT KILLER.

Ex-FBI agent turned fiction crime writer Rowan Smith wakes up one morning to discover someone is using her books as blueprints for murder.

Her former FBI boss fears one of her past arrests is out to terrorize her and insists she hire a bodyguard, or he’ll assign two FBI agents to watch her. Rowan, who relishes her privacy and solitary life, doesn’t want a bodyguard, but reluctantly hires ex-cop Michael Flynn.

The killer systematically goes through each book and chooses a victim, sending mementoes of the crime to Rowan. Michael’s brother, freelance DEA agent John Flynn, accuses Rowan of hiding something and calls in favors to learn enough to confront her. She confesses that her father and brother killed her family. Her father is in a mental institution and her brother was killed trying to escape. They fall into bed needing a physical connection. The murderer kills Michael that night.

John and Rowan deal with their guilt over Michael’s murder as they work with the FBI to find the murderer. They discover that Rowan’s boss lied to her about her brother’s death–he’s in a Texas penitentiary. But when they go there to confront him, they discover that someone took his place.

THE COPYCAT KILLER is a 100,000 word suspense novel with romantic elements, in the vein of Iris Johansen, Lisa Gardner and Tami Hoag.

In addition to THE COPYCAT KILLER, I have two additional single-title romantic suspense novels, a futuristic suspense currently under consideration at Dorchester, and a women’s fiction novel with a ghost as a main character.

A full is available upon request. Thank you for taking the time to consider my story.

Sincerely,
Author

Nathan asked for the letters for his “Agent for a Day” contest where writers could pretend they were agents and request or reject manuscripts based on a one-page query letter. The “Agents” could only request five manuscripts, and they were told that there were three queries that led to published books among the fifty posted.

The whole thing stemmed from that agent twitter thing that I didn’t follow and still don’t get, except that apparently a bunch of authors were ticked off that some agents were cruel in their rejections.

Welcome to the real world, Neo.

All I have to say to anyone who feels such is to read some of the one-and-two-star reviews at Amazon. Feel free to read what people say about my books. Develop a thick skin and get over it, or you’ll never survive this business with your sanity intact.

So with nearly 300 comments, my query had a 15% request rate. Compare that to the 59% request rate I had when I originally sent it.

Some of the comments about why they were passing:

1) I listed my bio first.

I may be wrong, but I think this is a dumb reason for rejecting a query. Maybe it’s not standard form, but to reject an idea because of format of a letter seems a bit short-sighted.

After the contest was over, Nathan said:

But more importantly, I think this contest goes to show how people may have overemphasized the query itself when they were playing agents. The queries that generated the highest response rate were the most technically precise. They were tidy, they were well-organized, they followed the rules. They were good queries (and some of them may go on to have success stories of their own). But this wasn’t a contest to spot the best queries.

When an agent is reading a query we’re trying to look past the query to get a sense of the underlying book. We’re evaluating the concept and the writing, not ticking off a box of requirements. . . .

. . . A good concept and strong writing are more important than good query form. . . .

Now, a strong query helps your odds and your request rate . . . But remember: the most important thing is not writing a good query, but rather writing a good book. A strong concept is so important.

2) Work sounds too familiar.

I didn’t take offense to these comments because this book was written in 2003, sold in 2004 and published in January 06.

However, how some of the “agents” felt my book was too similar to a 90s movie COPYCAT. I never saw the movie, so I looked it up–though I was comfortable in my ignorance to say that my book was nothing like it. I was right. The movie’s premise was about a serial killer recreating famous murders of the past. (Great idea! I want to see the movie now.) My book was recreating the fictional murders of a crime writer. Since CASTLE just came out this year, I’m pretty safe in saying I had my idea first. But in all honesty, you can give 100 authors the same premise and you’ll still have 100 distinctly different stories. Creativity is truly individual, and there are no new ideas.

On concepts, Nathan said:

One of the reasons that the agents for a day missed some of the actually published works is that the queries did not demonstrate wholly original concepts. They possibly sounded like they had been done before.

But here’s the thing about book concepts: originality is (somewhat) overrated.

[snip]

About once a generation a Mary Shelley or H.G. Wells or Tolkien or S.E. Hinton comes along to invent a new genre basically from scratch. Odds are you’re not that person (although if you are, I want to meet you).

All the rest of the mortals on the planet, even our best writers, are working within fairly established genres and tropes.

There were detective novels before George Pelecanos, there were dragon and boy stories before Christopher Paolini, there were wizard school books before J.K. Rowling, there were mistaken guilt stories before Ian Mcwan’s ATONEMENT. What sets these writers apart is a unique take on an established trope. And ultimately that comes down to execution.

What is a unique take on an established trope? It varies from book to book. . . .

. . . it’s very nearly impossible to be wholly original. Even when new genres are invented they tend to use classic story arcs that have been around for millennia — the coming of age story, the great man with a fatal flaw, the hubris tragedy, the celebrity memoir. When new genres are invented they just place these stories in a new world.

Unless it is truly out there, pretty much everything is a fresh take on an existing trope. It really does need to feel fresh, but that’s not the same as being completely original. The originality is all about how it’s done, not what it’s about.

3) Comparing myself to other authors.

In the letter, I stated that my book may appeal to readers who enjoy Lisa Gardner, Iris Johansen and Tami Hoag. Why? Because I wanted my prospective agent to immediately see the market I was aiming for. In truth, my books have a bit more romance in them than those three write today, but at the time (early 2000s) they were all writing edgy romantic suspense/thrillers, which is what I was writing. I wasn’t saying I wrote like them, or was better than them, or was the “next” one of them. I simply said that their readers may like my tone, and I still believe this is a great way to show an agent your intended market.

4) “The story sounds as though it might be interesting, but the query itself isn’t.” . . . “I can see where this would be an intriguing story and an edge of your seat suspense, but this blurb doesn’t get me there.”

I think one of the main points of Nathan’s exercise is that agents are trained, through experience and instinct, to pull the story from the query. If they think they can sell the story, if it’s something they have passion or interest in, they’ll request pages. A sharp query letter may get an author read, but in the end, it’s ALWAYS about the writing. Hmm, I wonder if he would have requested mine? Probably not, because I don’t think he represents romantic suspense, even darker RS like I write. One of the queries I would have requested wasn’t the best query in the pile, but it had something special about it that had me intrigued enough that I wanted to see if the author was a good storyteller.

Many authors have been rejected on their first novel. Nicholas Sparks has a great article here on his website about how he found his agent for THE NOTEBOOK. He queried 25 agents and 24 rejected him, even after reading his book.

But it only takes one.

So what did this exercise teach me?

1) I like rejection. I must have been a masochist in a previous life.

2) I appreciate more the experience and wisdom of good agents who can pull the idea from the query, because it’s not as easy as it looks. (I picked only one of the other two published books; only two of nearly 300 “agents” picked all three published books.)

3) I was lucky that my agent got past my imperfect query and thought my concept had merit, because good queries with strong concepts are still better.

4) It’s still all about the writing.

So do you think you could be an agent? Do you think you can look past technical imperfection and find the nugget of a good story? Do you think that agents are cruel in their rejections? Should they give more? What if they don’t know why they don’t want to see it, it just doesn’t speak to them?

Definitely some things to think about.

I also have some good news. My fabulous agent sold the first two books of my Lucy Kincaid series to Ballantine. Woo hoo! I am so excited about writing Lucy’s books. She is such a compelling character for me, and this will be a little bit different (but the same . . . ha!) They’ll be romantic thrillers, but there’ll be a multi-book relationship and two love interests. I’m really excited . . . the first comes out in October of 2010. But that’s after the first two books in my Seven Deadly Sins series (March 2010 and June 2010.)

Comment, share, tell us about your queries, rejections, agents, favorite blogs, or anything else that comes to mind!

©2010 Murder She Writes. All Rights Reserved.

1  1