What makes my story better then yours

[Boneman]

And every single writer in the whole Universe (okay, with the exception of Salman Rushdie, perhaps) felt exactly as you did, when they were unpublished, struggling writers...

 

[goldhawk]

What makes my story better than yours? I might get paid for mine; I would get anything for yours.

I am writing a book, I intend to send it to a publisher with the hopes of getting it published. As I think about this, a thought hits me. What makes my book any better then those thousands whose are rejected on a weekly basis.

I just can't imagine that something I write is better in terms of style, quality, story, interest or anything that would set me above the rest of the rag tag group attempting to get something published but are rejected.
It's quite a scary thought, and a valid thought, why is my story better?

In the music industry, they say if you can't play the melody of your song with one finger, it will never be a hit. The same is true in fiction. If the fundamental core of your story does not strike an emotional cord with the readers, it won't be a hit. And likely, no editor would consider publishing it.

Take, for example, Star Wars: why is it so popular? Its characters a simplistic, its villains are tripe, its plot predictable. But at its core, it's about a young man who gets pissed off at the universe and decides to do something about it. It strikes a chord with a lot of people because, at one time, we have all been young and pissed off at the universe. And it feels good to watch someone finally get back at it.

A lot of writers think that storytelling is vampires, or werewolves, or dragons, or magic, or whatever the MacGuffin Of The Month is. If they can just get The Idea, then their path to success is assured. Not so. Storytelling is about strring up strong emotions and give a satisfactory resolution to them.

 

[Jon Sprunk]

I forget where I heard this, but maybe it will help you:

When writing, you have believe your story is going to be the best thing ever written.
When editing, you have to believe it's the worst.
When sending it out, you have to believe it's the best again.


Confidence is key in this business. Your career cannot begin until you produce something tangible, refine it, and then send it out to be read by people who can make things happen.

 

[Dash]

What everyone else said, really.

If you can punctuate / spell / write well, you are already way ahead of most people. Some of the stuff out there is quite shocking!

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

(Well, I suppose I could send it to Theresa to be deflated, if I could afford it ...)

I'm not in business to deflate stories, but to help improve them. There are, however, people who are not yet seasoned enough as writers to recognize even the best advice when they receive it.* (And I would not take their money.) I learned a lot of things by trial and error that I am convinced I would not have been open to learning in any other way. Once I had learned them, I was ready to benefit from advice I would have scorned before. Many, many people reach that point much earlier than I did; others never seem to reach it.

In writers' groups I have seen it again and again: Everyone in the group is in agreement about the story's worst flaws, the writer listens carefully to everything, nods, takes notes, is sure that he or she understands -- and then comes back the next week with four chapters entirely rewritten and the same old mistakes dressed up in new clothes.

For some writers, the acquisition of skills is a more or less steady progress, for others it more often comes in bursts and epiphanies. The wait between epiphanies can be a discouraging time.

As long as you can look back at your previous draft and see for yourself things that you would do differently, you are learning, and it is too soon to give up. When you no longer see things you can improve (which is different from not seeing things that could be improved), then it is time to let it go, one way or the other -- either send it out or put it aside until you can look at it again with a critical eye.

*A remark NOT directed at anyone in this thread.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

My trouble is not seeing WHAT needs improving-that is glaringly obvious in my work.


What my trouble always seems to be is how to improve it.....

 

[RcGrant]

Why is my story better?

It's not. If I believed yours was better then I wouldn't be writing.

Sounds egotistical, and in a way it is, but I have learned that one of the most important things during the writing process is self belief. Without it, that book will be so much harder to write.

The time for freaking out (if you have to do it), is after you have sent out that manuscript. Easier said than done, I know.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Well, freaking out is a rather hard term, RC. Suffice it to say that those of us who don't really remain cool merely get nervous.


I've yet to discover a condition called Writer's Homicide Syndrome, you know.

 

[RcGrant]

Well, freaking out is a rather hard term, RC. Suffice it to say that those of us who don't really remain cool merely get nervous.


I've yet to discover a condition called Writer's Homicide Syndrome, you know.

Guess I'll freak out alone then.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Yes, well, I may be wrong and I may be the only one NOT to completely freak out.

I hardly ever seem perturbed about anything-mostly, and I say this with the utmost of shame, out of indifference-but I realize I'm certainly not the model for humans everywhere.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I will tell you when sanity went reeling out of control for me: between the day an editor wrote to ask for my entire manuscript and the day she called to say that they wanted to publish my book. When you send something out and don't expect to hear back for a long time the waiting is comparatively easy. You may be nervous at first, but you get over it. But when you live in an hourly state of expectation for three or four months ...

I know, I know, pitiful, isn't it? Naturally, in retrospect it was all worth it, but at the time it was happening it was harrowing.

 

[Toby Frost]

I went on holiday to a music festival while my publisher was reading my full manuscript. I think my friends thought I was rewarding myself: in truth it was just a very good distraction. Funnily enough the thrill of being published only really hit me just before the book launch: perhaps I was being wary of it all going improbably wrong!

 

[Boneman]

And it's just occured to me: your book doesn't have to be better than mine - it has to be as good as. Or different. Or the same in a different way. And nobody knows what that is - your book will be picked up, because it's the very best it can be, and the Agent/Publisher see a market for it.

Honest, I've seen books published that were worse than mine (and ergo, worse than yours....), so just get it done, redone, redone, redone, redone, polished, polished, polished, until it gleams and then you can't fail!!

 

[Cayal]

Well it is possible that my book is a total cliche and I have no imagination what so ever (there are no vampires though...)

But I like the advice given in this thread.

 

[MeriPie]

I think the best you can really do is write the perfect story that you would love to read... then give it to other people to tear it apart and decide if they want to read it too.

 

[Cayal]

I got a little feedback from my editor friend (she has yet to finish).
Summing up from a 5 minute MSN chat while I was at work and she was late for work she said the story was good but I need to work on grammar, specifically hyphenated compounds (which I found a good grammar site here - EditFast Grammar Resource: Adjectives and Adverbs: Complete, Logical Comparisons)

Anyway obviously grammar is going to be important when an editor/publisher looks at your book, but in regards to more sophisticated grammar (for lack of better term) how important is it compared to basic grammar?

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Depends on whether or not you know how to use it correctly.