CPD - what’s your practice?

[tinkerdan]

It should include reading within your genre and then a bit outside.

 

[AlexH]

I had no idea what CPD meant either. I know of a certification authority called CPD, but it could've been Chicago Police Department, or even Cephalo Pelvic Disproportion.

I read about writing, listen to podcasts, watch videos. Reading stories is part of my own development, having wide-ranging interests, watching films/TV. I attend writing workshops - I recently read that David Farland still loves to do this (as well as giving his own), despite being a multi-million seller. I listen to other people read. I rewrite old stories, look back over old critiques. And probably a few other things I can't remember off the top of my head.

 

[Mouse]

Alright, I'll try to answer. So SWOT:
S: Dialogue, and not being long-winded.
W: Literally everything else.
O: Myself
T: Be better?

And I'd CPD it by... listening to people who are good at the stuff I'm not and seeing how they do it. Ooh, I do go to BristolCon and listen to the panels - I also occasionally pay attention. Um... yeah, that's all I've got. Basically I just keep writing until I get better.

 

[ralphkern]

In terms of CPD, I wish to pull the word professional out and consider that.

As a professional writer, you have a product to deliver in a professional way, and in a timely manner. That might be an expectation set on you by a publisher, or in the case of Indie, by your fans - who are your ultimate arbiters either trad or indie. Your professional development isn't simply about being the finest wordsmith, it's also about achieving and improving on those two objectives as well.

By and large, I find that authors either edit down or edit up. Some write vast tracts of text, then boil it down into the final product. (@Brian G Turner did I read somewhere your first draft of the Gathering clocked in at 700K words?) Others, like myself, draw and outline, then start colouring it in. I normally add 50% to my first draft at least. This takes me several passes to do. (normally at least one for character, one for description, and one for consistency). Then of course it's off to my editors, narrators etc.

Actually, a massive means of improving would be to reduce the amount of passes it takes and make the first or early drafts closer to the final product thus making it more timely in its delivery WHILE maintaining quality.

On considering practical advice on how to go about that, perhaps set yourself a new challenge. Enter the competitions, but strictly allow yourself only five passes of your work before putting it up... the next four.... the next three and so on.

A related note on this topic. I belong to a writing business group which has done a lot of empirical analysis on the optimal release rate for books in a series.

It's 18 days. Yup, not weeks, not months - Days.

Obviously there are ways to 'hack' this such as prewriting the series, but at my production rate of around 6 months per book, an 18 month gap is a LONG time without new content in this environment. As someone who is pretending to be a professional writer - I know I need to improve and seek ways to close that gap while maintaining the quality that my readers rightly demand.

And plans are afoot...

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think so much of cpd is also about personal goals - these days a cpd process is seen as strongest when it is holistic. Re!easing a series in 18 day gaps would be my personal hell. And a killer in the Irish market.
Which is where the personal comes into it. I can look at that info and decide its a no-no for where I want to go and where my income stream comes from (delivering workshops brings me way more than sales - and attracts funding). Ralph can look at it and decide utilising the techniques matches his needs. Its all about knowing your path and then matching development to those needs.

Incidentally SWoT in the managerial world is strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats - but I rather like Phyre's!

 

[tinkerdan]

This would both be insane and impractical for me.

A related note on this topic. I belong to a writing business group which has done a lot of empirical analysis on the optimal release rate for books in a series.

It's 18 days. Yup, not weeks, not months - Days.

And I think also for anyone trying to write professionally; unless you find a way to move your editors and proof readers and Alphas or Betas and your design team for both cover and internal design into your home where you can keep them locked up for 18 days.

Although if you are going through amazon I can see the logic in that after 18 days your new release starts to get buried quickly and if you have two in a series you can extend that new book exposure by another 18 days by close releases like this. Three or four in a series and you can extend it 54 and then 72 days.

However without some insane infrastructure of your own, your quality will suck.

 

[sknox]

I agree with tinkerdan here. I've worked with editors and artists, and there's no way they are going to adhere to an 18-day production cycle. That may be optimal in the abstract, as in optimizing income, but I don't see it mapping out to any realistic outcome for the individual writer. Even a publishing house would need a whole stable of writers, editors, proofreaders, and artists, plus a management team, to produce at that rate.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

To be fair - I don't think Ralph was suggesting getting a book out in 18 days but more a planned release scheldule that allowed that - so writing the series first, prepping for publication, then launching.

I do feel there are different models. I have to be honest, as a reader, I rarely find myself drawn into the quick-release-scheldule style books. I have tried loads of the series that follow that model and find they lack the depth that comes from taking more time. But they sell by the bucketload do there is obviously a market out there to be hit - and it would be a profitable one.

I'd rather wait an extra 12 months for the latest Bryan Wigmore and really savour the slower reading process it brings, and I am increasingly moving to a slower, more thoughtful, release model. The Solomon's Choice comes around the question of being happy to take the hit on the sales that might deliver - and I am. I'm not planning on leaving my job to become a writer, anyhow! Nor wanting to.

But I suspect we're straying well away from the OP and into a new thread entirely.

 

[Toby Frost]

Personally, I don’t see what I’m doing as directly equivalent to the kind of CPD that a lawyer or teacher does. For one thing, I’m not sure who or what I’m measuring it against: a lawyer has to be up to speed with developments in the law and modern working practices, but all kinds of fiction can be written successfully, a lot of it not “cutting edge”. There isn’t a single market and not knowing what happened in last year’s Hugo awards doesn’t really matter as much as not knowing how to apply the Civil Procedure Rules.

In terms of getting better at writing, well, that’s something that I would always be trying to do. I find articles about the technical side of writing interesting, and so I read quite a lot of them. I am interested in writing about different things as I go on – from the point of view of an unusual character, or using a new plot structure – but I don’t set out thinking I ought to do that. It’s really whatever the story demands in order to be told as best as possible.

I think lawyers get a bad rep for jargon. Romance novels seem to have a huge range of abbreviations to say what goes on.

 

[The Big Peat]

On the every 18 days thing - writing the whole series first is an option. Its what Gonk did after all.

I do sometimes wonder whether we're going to see a return to a serial market - probably in subscription form - as impatience seems more and more the done thing.

Anyway, back to look at the first page and think.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Personally, I don’t see what I’m doing as directly equivalent to the kind of CPD that a lawyer or teacher does. For one thing, I’m not sure who or what I’m measuring it against: a lawyer has to be up to speed with developments in the law and modern working practices, but all kinds of fiction can be written successfully, a lot of it not “cutting edge”. There isn’t a single market and not knowing what happened in last year’s Hugo awards doesn’t really matter as much as not knowing how to apply the Civil Procedure Rules.

In terms of getting better at writing, well, that’s something that I would always be trying to do. I find articles about the technical side of writing interesting, and so I read quite a lot of them. I am interested in writing about different things as I go on – from the point of view of an unusual character, or using a new plot structure – but I don’t set out thinking I ought to do that. It’s really whatever the story demands in order to be told as best as possible.

I think lawyers get a bad rep for jargon. Romance novels seem to have a huge range of abbreviations to say what goes on.

See, I think there are two different things going on here. Sorry, I'm such an anorak on this but it's one of my areas of expertise, for my sins.
As @ralphkern mentioned last night the P stands for Professional - and so we often have CPD in jobs or roles where keeping up to date is very important. I attend mandatory CPD about the regulatory environment for instance (and riveting they are too ), and lots of other lovely things. That's the professional bit.
But the C and D are about Continued Development - and more and more CPD is being used for wider personal development into softer skill areas like eg leadership. When they are, they have a different focus on maintaining and improving practice across a range of behaviours.

I think the latter definitely applies to writing.

 

[The Big Peat]

I guess for me its all about identifying my worst area as a writer, then looking for ways to fix it. Not very fancy but there we go.

Right now (theoretically) I'm looking at blending in descriptions into the text to avoid the Scylla of Too Little Description and the Charybdis of Infodumping. Prior to that I did a lot on narrative structure and fair amounts on world building and character voice. After I get the description thing nailed, I think I'm going to revisit fight scenes.

 

[Toby Frost]

But the C and D are about Continued Development - and more and more CPD is being used for wider personal development into softer skill areas like eg leadership. When they are, they have a different focus on maintaining and improving practice across a range of behaviours.

I'm afraid that I don't really understand the nuances of this. I just keep writing and editing, and sometimes I read books about the technical side of it, like Stephen King's On Writing. As I said above, I try to attempt new things - whether they end up publishable or not - but that's about all I do, really.

 

[Dan Jones]

Actually, a massive means of improving would be to reduce the amount of passes it takes and make the first or early drafts closer to the final product thus making it more timely in its delivery WHILE maintaining quality.

I wholeheartedly endorse this approach, and find “pantsing” anathema to this method of working. Editing whilst writing means perhaps a slower draft is produced, but also one of better quality.

But that’s not a CPD issue. Development comes in many forms, and I dont think I can justifiably label myself a professional writer just yet in any case - it’s not as though any part of my living is subsidised by writing (yet).

In any case, development comes in many forms, as I say. It could be learning to be more time-efficient, to be a better editor, improving concentration, or improving one’s network of contacts. All of these constitute professional development to me, and there are many more such items.

As for the technical side of things, I’m not sure you can develop in any other way than simply write and gain experience. There’s the old adage that you have to knock out a million words before you can consider yourself adept, or good, or very good or whatever it is, and there’s probably some truth in that.

 

[The Big Peat]

As for the technical side of things, I’m not sure you can develop in any other way than simply write and gain experience. There’s the old adage that you have to knock out a million words before you can consider yourself adept, or good, or very good or whatever it is, and there’s probably some truth in that.

Yeah, but what are we writing? Does it matter, or is there some point to doing exercises aimed at focusing on one particular aspect of writing? Would just sitting there coming up with pithy analogies (which I believe Marlowe is meant to have done) count as words? Or useful? Should we start with novels, or work our way up from short stories? Etc.etc. Which is not to say there's universal answers to those things, but there's probably more we can to do help ourselves than just writing. No football coach tells the lads to go and just have a kickaround.

I feel that, as much as anything, that's the point of this post - what are we doing to direct ourselves and get the most out of our words?

 

[HareBrain]

As for the technical side of things, I’m not sure you can develop in any other way than simply write and gain experience.

I'm not sure. How many of us, for example, have studied the rules of rhetoric with the aim of incorporating their effects into our work? I came across the idea of the "rule of three" pretty much by accident, and quickly realised that it's often very effective. I'm sure there must be others, and when I get a moment I'm planning to read more about them.

That's the kind of thing I would call CPD -- the identification of areas of weakness and deliberate steps to address them. There's a sporting saying "race your strengths, train your weaknesses" which I think could also apply to writing.

 

[Boneman]

What's rhetoric...?

When I wuz an osteopath I had to produce evidence of 15 hours per year working with others and 15 hours of working on my own. And reflect on it.

As a writer... one day I'll sit down and work out how much I've forked out for CPD in all the courses I've done. I'm too frightened to do it right now... Being on here counts as CPD, and I read, read, read. And write occasionally, so it has to be edited 12 times before I like it.

 

[The Big Peat]

Besides its not just all writing. Research and ideation plays a big part in most manuscripts as well.

Something I do occasionally - not as often or as completely as I should - is to try and describe everything I pass as I was describing it for a book. I should really write it down after when I do it as well. I think there's a lot to be said for the idea that the best writers, by and large, are the best observers. It doesn't matter how beautifully you describe something if you're not capturing reality as know it.

 

[Dan Jones]

No football coach tells the lads to go and just have a kickaround.

I'm not sure that's a useful analogy, as there are players such as Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain who are seen to be "overdeveloped" by sporting academies and lose the grit and spit that comes from, as you say, having a kickabout. There's a lot to be said for operating outside the shackles of certain structures and parameters.

In which case, I'd say that words, in whatever form they come out, all count. I wouldn't say that, pound for pound (word for word?), a short story is more useful for honing craft than a novella, or blog post, or a novel. It all helps, as it broadens our experience and enables us to cover new ground.

I'm not sure. How many of us, for example, have studied the rules of rhetoric with the aim of incorporating their effects into our work? I came across the idea of the "rule of three" pretty much by accident, and quickly realised that it's often very effective. I'm sure there must be others, and when I get a moment I'm planning to read more about them.

I remember you mentioning the rule of three before, and it does seem to be a useful thing. However, you admitted having come across it by accident, so I don't think you can describe that as targeted development (ie you didn't identify that your writing was lacking it). Or do I detect the merest hint of flippancy in planning to read about something you discovered by accident?

I think there's also another point that people show willingness to improve their understanding and craft / art in different ways. You and I read about literary theory and the like because that's the way our minds work and it's what we've studied in the past; VB studies the sciences and applies it in his writing, and others will study other areas that make it into their writing. And for some people that will simply involve reading "the rules" and applying them. Doesn't make any of those approaches wrong or right, but what works for the individual. And people may find that, as they write more and more, with or without that million word target in mind, they may want to open their minds to new ideas, techniques, content and theories. So, in conclusion, I stand by my argument that writing begets development.

 

[The Big Peat]

I'm not sure that's a useful analogy, as there are players such as Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain who are seen to be "overdeveloped" by sporting academies and lose the grit and spit that comes from, as you say, having a kickabout. There's a lot to be said for operating outside the shackles of certain structures and parameters.

In which case, I'd say that words, in whatever form they come out, all count. I wouldn't say that, pound for pound (word for word?), a short story is more useful for honing craft than a novella, or blog post, or a novel. It all helps, as it broadens our experience and enables us to cover new ground.

That's the argument for a better and more individualised structured approach to learning as much as it is the argument for no structure at all.

And I think its a bit glib to point to an example of a system needing to improve as a rejection of systems for learning altogether (apologies if that's not what you intended to say, but I can draw no other reasonable conclusion) when close to every form of training known to man uses such form of structure and has exercises dedicated to concentrating to one single aspect of the craft at a time, which are routinely used at professional level, rather than just telling people "Just go out there and have fun" all the time.

And - okay, yes, there is a lot to be said for "Just go out there and do it" from time to time, although its crucial to note that the most successful incidences of this in sport tend to feature far smaller versions of the game than normally played - but no professional coach just tells people to go and do that all the time. Partly because they and their salary wouldn't be needed. But mainly because you get better results for taking time on individual skills.

Which is why I don't think your statement holds up. A writer with a weakness for plotting is probably best off doing short stories and novellas to get the hang of it than big novels or flash pieces. Flash pieces, on the other hand, could be more useful for someone who's not great at introducing characters in a memorable way - lots of flash pieces with a different character every time.

And you might say "But this doesn't sound fun and why write if it isn't fun". Which is a relevant point. But that's up to everyone to find what's fun and what's not.

So, in conclusion, I stand by my argument that writing begets development.

I don't think that's in question.

Its whether writing, just in and of itself with no qualifiers attached, is the most successful way of begetting development all the time for everyone.