Wiscon 29 Con Report

Now for the long awaited part deux!

This entry is part two of my Wiscon report for Sunday, May 29. Check out the first part here.

Day Three - Sunday, May 29 (Part Two)
After the "Magical and Monstrous YAs" readings wrapped up, we hung out in our hotel room for awhile and I polished off my lunch. Next on the agenda was the Strange Horizons Tea Party. In case you haven't heard about Strange Horizons, they're an online mag publishing much quality speculative fiction. We drank tea, chatted with Greg about writing workshops and writing in general, and caught up with a couple of other people (alas, my memory fails me). Susan got up on a chair and preached the virtues of Strange Horizons and encouraged people to check it out (she's the fiction editor / editor-in-chief at SH). Run, don't walk, that mouse of yours over to SH to see what you've been missing!

-----<>-----

Feeling refreshed from a couple of tasty teas and snacks, it was off to the next panel, this one entitled '"Rewrite" is a Four-Letter Word.' Panelists were Laurie J. Marks, Sarah Monette, Justine Larbalestier, and Nisi Shawl.

The panelists introduced themselves, with Nisi being first up (she was the moderator for this panel). She has published short stories so far, and has finished writing a novel. She has a book coming out soon, entitled "Writing the Other." This is being rewritten to editorial suggestion. In general, she dislikes rewriting. Justine countered Nisi with a declaration that she loves rewriting. Her first book, "Magic or Madness," has just been published (schnazzy cover, btw!). Sarah's first novel, entitled "Mélusine," is coming out in August. This was rewritten 3 times, with ground up rewrites for 3 or 4 years! She is ambivalent about rewriting, neither loving nor hating it. Laurie talked about her novel, "Earthlogic," and is currently revising another, entitled "Waterlogic." She sees revising as 'suspending completion,' and is rather sad when she's done. She would rather rewrite than write.

Nisi had 10 rewriting tips from Geoff Ryman on hand, and made reference to these throughout the panel. The first of the tips was "Read aloud." Justine lives with another writer, and said that by reading aloud you tend to spot things that aren't as brilliant as you thought they were, including stuff that just sounds awful. Her writer-in-residence gives critical responses, but focuses more on global, big-picture issues. The book feels more 'alive' when reading aloud. Sarah said that by reading aloud, you're making it harder to mentally edit mistakes out, with the bonus that it's also good practice for readings. Laurie's comment was basically that there is a limited value to tips--each person approaches rewriting differently. She teaches composition, and feels that you can't make any general statement about writing that would be true all the time.

Nisi mentioned that she prefers first drafts to rewriting--it feels 'free-er.' She read from Geoff's comments for the first tip, which were that by reading aloud, you can feel yourself getting bored with the bad bits. She then posed the question to the other panelists: "How many rewrites do you typically do?" Laurie said she wrote the first chapter on one of her books 25 times! She said a positive attitude on the first draft is helpful, saying to yourself "this'll do for now." Sarah talked about the distinction between editing, revision, and rewriting. Justine apparently liked 'nuking' bits of her novel, and knows someone who claims not to rewrite (sounds like Heinlein, although it wasn't).

Laurie has an interesting approach to rewriting. She doesn't use the computer to write. She types up her writing, prints it out, and replaces every word on another piece of paper. It works for her! As an example, with 430 pages, roughly ten percent of the words could be replaced completely 3 times.

Justine used to hate rewriting. She had a lot of publications by the age of 12, but then stopped getting published from about 15 through to her early 30s. She learned to rewrite and enjoy it during that time. You learn how to actually craft your writing and find out what is in there. She noted that Robin McKinley (one of the guests of honour at this convention, incidently) writes for long hours continuously. Justine makes a living from writing now, but tries to only write for 4 hours per day.

Sarah said that the first draft is merely an approximation. Nisi asked the panelists "Do you ever think 'you can use this later?'" Justine said she has a file for other bits she can use. She's an obsessive rewriter, although once you've polished to a certain point, it becomes harder to put things in; the book starts to 'close down.' Sarah said that bits of story keep coming back to her until she gets it right. She only keeps things if she's done something really clever with language. Laurie has never gone back to retrieve something she has crossed out; she is more interested in what comes next! Nisi keeps things, but she knows this is just a pacifier.

Nisi posed the question, "On whose say-so do you do rewrites?" Justine said that sometimes she just writes filler to get to the end, to keep typing, even though she knows it'll have to go. She gave one example of writing 15,000 words which had to go! She kept going through her writing, looking for where it went wrong. It was a difficult rewrite. She said that happened in the first third of her novel. The first half took her 5 months to write, and the second took a mere 5 weeks. Laurie said that you learn to tell earlier when the writing is going the wrong way. She talked about 'flow' that keeps you rewriting. She uses character dialogue, writing scenes where they all sit around and talk about what will happen (she doesn't keep these scenes). She revises based on her own internal dialogue, or when other people read her manuscripts and identify logic flaws, etc. Nisi recently rewrote a section of her novel for Eileen Gunn. She rewrites for herself, or another aspect of herself, but primarily she rewrites to editorial order. She also rewrites to her old Clarion class, imagining what she thinks her classmates would say.

Justine stated that she has written 4 novels, has one published, and has another coming out next year. She still feels like a beginning novelist. Nisi asks "if it is ever done." Sarah said simply, "this is the best I can do now." Laurie said that sometimes you just get done, or tired of it.

Nisi asked "Do you ever read your work and not want to rewrite it?" She says 'yes.' Justine mentioned one writer who had Alzheimer's and was read all his works. He didn't recognize it; sometimes he liked it, and other times not. Laurie sometimes forgets how good some stuff is; memory provides distance.

Nisi read more tips: "Mark problems, not fixes." Sarah said she has to solve a problem when she sees it; she can't come back to it. Laurie suggests making rewriting a separate process, otherwise it could lead to being paralyzed about writing, or perfectionism. Justine knows one writer who has been rewriting a novel for 12 years, but who thinks it is never good enough. Laurie said sometimes those sorts of issues are also life issues.

More tips: "Don't fool yourself. There's the book you're writing, and the one you wish you'd written," "Count chapter word counts," "Don't finesse. If it doesn't work, cut it out. Don't replace it," "Revise at least one draft backward, ie start at the end and work your way to the beginning." Just in case anyone started treating these tips as gospel, Nisi read another one: "Nothing I tell you is true!" The panelists commented on these tips. Justine talked about focusing on books with less than 100k or 120k words. Apparently B&N won't take books retailing for more than $25 for brand new writers. However, this is not something you should consider when writing, since it could lead to paralysis or missing fruitful ideas. Laurie said she revises the last third first. An audience member noted that one writer suggests revising in different areas (presumably focusing on character, dialogue, plot, logic, etc separately). Someone else asked if any of the panelists used technology to search through their manuscript. Sarah admitted searching for 'suddenly.'

Nisi read a final tip: "Save your earlier drafts." The panelists mentioned saving earlier drafts in separate files, or print-outs. An audience member asked about how to handle critique comments. The panelists agreed that a comment may point out a problem area, but not necessarily the specific cause of the problem. Try to consider what lead to that particular comment being made; the thing that caused the problem may lay elsewhere. Laurie chimed in, saying that the critiquer could just be a dunce!

Wrapping up, the panelists answered one final question from the audience: "How long do you wait before rewriting?" Laurie said with short stories, she may put them aside for awhile. Justine writes according to deadline, and both Sarah and Nisi said they sometimes just put stuff aside overnight before rewriting.

And so ended another interesting and informative panel. I'm always interested to hear how others approach rewriting, since it's usually a chore for me :)

-----<>-----

After the panel, we headed off to dinner with David, Marsha, Pam, Hannah, John and family, and others (apologies to those I've forgotten). Following the delicious dinner and marvellous conversations, we trekked back to the hotel to take our place in the exceedingly long Dessert Salon line which stretched around the second-floor staircase and half the length of the first floor. Some clever people (you know who you are!) refused to be herded like cattle and merely waited, contented, by the top of the stairs until the centipede-like line made its way past. I waved, and they waved back, as civil people do ;) Eventually we got our dessert, and sat with ktempest and others.

During the announcements prior to the Guest of Honour speeches, they mentioned that next year Wiscon will most likely limit attendance. Apparently the hotel cannot handle too many more people! Since the convention organizers are still quite happy with the venue, the attendance cap might become necessary. They urged everyone to donate to the Wiscon organization in order for next year's convention to be able to invite the past thirty years' Guests of Honour--a costly proposition!

Following a presentation by a Japanese fan (announcing a Japanese Tiptree award), and an announcement about the Carl Brandon society (now taking memberships), Gwyneth Jones took to the stage for her "Guest of Honour" speech. From what I recall, the theme was madness, and she read an excerpt from one of her novels. Next up was Robin McKinley, recalling the trials and tribulations of a writing life in her particularly eloquent speech. Apparently she has gone through a lot lately, including moving house.

Following the speeches, we headed off to yet another panel! It truly was a day for panels, which is why it has taken me so long to document day 3 :)

-----<>-----

The late night panel was titled, "Writing Across Genre Boundaries," and the panelists were Catherine Lundoff, Jacob Weisman, and Tim Pratt. Catherine writes across multiple genres, Tim's first novel is a contemporary fantasy with a Western angle (coming out later this year), and Jacob is editor and publisher at Tachyon publications.

Tim noted that it was difficult to find a publisher for his novel, given its mixing of different genres. Catherine said that genres are nothing more than marketing categories which are convenient for large publishers and booksellers. Tim thinks genres can be good for readers. He talked about Neal Stephenson's Baroque Cycle feeling like SF, but it isn't; more like cross-genre with wide appeal. Dean Koontz and Stephen King busted apart genres. They transcend genre, but Tim wants to know about how lesser-known writers fare. He's interested in seeing where his novel will be shelved. Catherine commented that Romance seems to blend better, in her opinion.

Jacob said the biggest problem is the way the industry works. You can have a mixed genre novel, but it will only get shelved one place in the bookstore. Being on the web can help in this regard. All panelists agreed that supernatural romances are doing well, with many publishers starting up new lines in this sub-genre. Catherine noted that romances are 50% of all book sales. An audience member said that romances tend to have a shorter shelf-life.

Catherine thought that smaller presses do crossing genre boundaries better, in general. Much audience discussion followed, with talk of J.D. Robb and Nora Roberts (same author), and police procedurals mixed with SF and romance.

Jacob mentioned that Tim's book is being marketed as a Western, but he has no say in this. Tim said that eventually some cross-genre work becomes accepted--erotic vampire novels, for instance. Catherine posed the question: "How do you market cross-genre?" Jacob said that a deep promotional budget helps!

Someone asked if the reading audience is becoming less segmented. Tim thought that with so many books coming out, it is probably the opposite. You could read only one type of novel without reading a different genre. Things might be loosening up though, with stuff being published that wouldn't have been previously. Jacob observed that the original cross-genre was gothic crossing into mainstream.

Jacob noted that his publishing company (a small press) would probably have about 7 books in a typical big book store. According to Tim, marketing and branding is becoming bigger. Genre categories are a way of getting books out of the thousands into the hands of readers. Catherine said that bookstores and publishers are very different than they used to be.

Someone observed that there are only a handful of distributors now. Tim said that prices are rising, more books are being published, and corporations want more profits. The panelists then talked about onling searching as a way around the distribution problem. Jacob noted that the big disadvantage of online searching is that you can't look at the actual book and see it with other books that might interest you. I don't really agree with this given my experience with Amazon.com. I rarely set foot in an actual bookstore these days, and have found many books of interest through suggestions on Amazon. I also do a lot of shopping on Clarkesworld Books.

Another audience question came up about return rates. Jacob gave the staggering statistic that return rates were up around 80% for about a year after 9/11. Catherine and Jacob talked about the demise of the independent bookstore for this and other reasons.

The panelists closed with a mention of their favourite cross-genre books. Catherine said "A Civil Campaign," Tim mentioned Jonathan Carroll's books, and Jacob thought maybe "The Golden Compass" was his favourite cross-genre book.

While this panel led in some interesting directions, I was a bit disappointed with certain audience members interrupting at regular intervals and spouting their opinions on different writers or whatever else sprang to mind. This derailed the panelists and led to a disjointed discussion which I had difficulty following. Audience participation is fine, but it should at least be relevant to the discussion at hand! The poor panelists could barely get a word in edgewise at times. I've seen this problem discussed on other con reports, with someone suggesting a tyrannical moderator is the key to preventing self-aggrandizing audience members from derailing the panel. I'm sure some entertainment value could be had with such an approach...

-----<>-----

Thus endeth day 3. The fourth and final installment will be considerably shorter than this behemoth, and hopefully I'll get it done within the next couple of days. If you're not Wiscon'ed out already, have a gander at some other wiscon reports meanwhile!