I wrote a book called Velocity. It's a science fiction book that's already about to enter the publishing process. However, I looked over it after I got some critical feedback and realized that the entire beginning was not the way I'd hoped it to be. Changing it would mean completely erasing two entire chapters as well as leaving some plot holes in the rest of the story. I'm completely stuck. I have no idea how to fix it without rewriting the entire book. my stories mean more to me than life and publishing a good novel has been my dream since I was seven. But now that I've finally gotten to this point, it would kill me to start all over. There has to be another way. Can anyone help me out?
You just answered your own question. You'll live. Very few people have found publishing success on their first writing attempt... or before the age of 30. Not really. Not unless you write it perfectly the first time, and very few people do that. Sure... get back to work.
A first time writer was told by a publisher to 'fix' her book by completely rewriting it. The writer was Harper Lee and the new book became ' To Kill a Mockingbird'. Your call, buddy.
Might help if you explain what's wrong with it in the first place? Plot holes? Likable characters coming across as ogres or vice versa? Does it not explain the intro properly? Can you not make minor adjustments? Why does it require the deletion of 2 whole chapters? Why will a rewrite of those 2 chapters not suffice?
It starts with a school shooting in which the main character is among a few survivors. This was supposed to set the stage for the traumatic event that would help with character development. However, it was extremely unorganized in the beginning, and the next chapter is him set as an adult. There were logical flaws in the second chapter too, one of them being the fact that he earned his PhD but worked at McDonald's. I want to change it to where he is an adult for the entire book and the event is revealed through conversation and/or flashbacks. I also want to start him off actually doing something more productive with his life considering the fact that earning a PhD takes years of effort. The only problem here is that both details are important enough to be recalled frequently throughout the story and changing them fixes the problems with logic but presents plot holes and also makes the reintroduction of some characters a lot less interesting.
You don't understand the actual problem. It's in the process of being published. To start over means to halt that process and restart the whole publishing process. I noticed the problem late. The book's been edited and the publisher likes it but I think that it's awful thanks to those details. I can't start over now. It's simply not an option for me
You're right. I don't understand the problem. If the editing has been completed to the publisher's satisfaction and they're paying you for it, what's the issue? Is it that you don't like it? Ultimately, it's the publisher's decision as far as final edits go, though they prefer to do that in concert with the author. And they're unlikely to stop the process. So if you have no options, there isn't anything to worry about it. I mean, you can worry if you like, but if you can't change it, what's the point?
Who are you publishing the book through? Options for withdrawing your manuscript prior to publication should be outlined in the contract you signed, and even if you can request it you may be burning that bridge forever with the publisher depending on how far along they are.
I don't have a solution, but I can tell you something that might make you feel a little better. That bit about a PhD working at McDonald's? It's not as unbelievable as you might think. Believe it or not, getting a PhD doesn't automatically get you a good job, and depending on the field you worked in (and the success of your publications) you very well may end up at a McDonalds, especially if you aren't interested in working at a university. So... just putting it out there that that isn't necessarily a plot hole.
If it's in the process of being published and the editor likes it, it may very well just be a bullet you need to bite. Take it on the chin, an author will always be their own worst critic. Publishers know what sells and there are loads of people on here who would love to swap places right now
It's already in the publishing process? Good! That's what you want, right? You've got a foot in the door. Use your changes to start the sequel. Different city, different names.
I'm also curious about the nature of the publisher, but assuming it's a traditional publishing contract, this probably isn't your decision to make. The best you can do is contact the publisher and see if they'll let you make changes this late in the process. Depending on how far along they are, the answer might be yes or might be no.
Though I am also curious as to the nature of your publisher, I do agree with most of the others, if the Publishers like it and it's already in the process of being published, then let it be. You might do more damage to yourself and future books by pestering the publicists for something you don't like as opposed to something they dislike. you can always amend it as a future edition of the book, or learn from it for future books you write.
Actually, @Homer Potvin is right. I know it's upsetting, but if you know there are flaws in your work, you need to accept that you need to make changes. And before you make the changes, you need to recognise what the problems are, and figure out a way to solve them. This isn't going to happen when you're too close to the original effort. I would suggest that you give yourself a cooling-off period, then go back and reread it again—from start to finish, not just your favourite bits. By cooling-off period, I mean get to the point where you can look at it as if somebody else wrote it. To the point where nothing you wrote is too precious to throw away or change. The good thing about this approach, besides giving you the opportunity to change stuff without pain, is that you will let the story 'cook' in your brain as well. This can result in 'eureka' moments, where you suddenly realise how to fix the problems, fill the plot holes, etc. Don't try to rush this process. It takes as long as it takes. Recognising that all your efforts aren't perfect from day one is one of the penny-dropping moments that will make you a better writer in the long run. And it's the long run that matters. As Homer said, get back to work. But sometimes 'work' means leave it alone and do something else (or write something else), till your brain readjusts from writing mode to editing mode on your original project. .............. Edited: I was responding to your original post and to Homer's initial response. You said your work was 'about to enter the publishing process,' so I assumed you hadn't actually entered it yet. Now it appears you have actually found a publisher who is raring to go with what you've given them? If so ...well, I'm just confused here. If you've been fortunate enough to snag a traditional publisher—who pays YOU and doesn't require an initial cash outlay from you—and you are simply experiencing 'seller's remorse,' then work with your publisher to sort the problems. If they don't see any problems, then you might be worrying for nothing. If they are a vanity publisher, however—a publishing house that charges you money (ANY money at any stage) to publish your book—I'd run. Run quickly. Run far. Hide. Vanity publishers make their money from YOU, the author, not from selling your books for you. They are very likely to be wildly enthusiastic about your book, in order to get you to 'publish' with them. Then they start charging you bits and bobs, and you are trapped. Run. Run quickly.
Stop. Don't think about how to fix it. Think about how to get ideas about fixing. - How about going to structural working? Do a beat sheat of your story. Do a synopsis. Try to think structural ways to think your problem. - How about going to character working? What kinds of ways there are to make characters write the story better? - What is the arch of plot? What is the arch of theme? How they are connected in different parts of your story? - Has your story world given you all it can give? Fixing story does not work if you fix the area where problems are. You must start fixing much earlier so that development of characters, plot, theme and story world weave your fabric as it should be. Don't patch or repair. Weave. It means starting before the start.
Well said. It's discouraging to have to 'begin again,' but the result will be worth it. And the learning process is invaluable. Nothing is wasted at all. It's amazing that recognising and correcting mistakes means you won't ever make THOSE kinds of mistakes again.
Do you know PTSD? Do you really know it? If you have a bad PTSD you can keep distance to it, but you can't escape it. You can cure it, but you can't escape it. And when you keep distance, some trigger takes all distance away in seconds. PTSD is like slave master that keeps the real person as its slave. And slave is not allowed to exseed master - ever. Only way to exseed PTSD-master is to cure, to get well, to get free. Then PTSD transforms from slave master to memory and starts to vanish very slowly. And the moment/time span of curing and transforming is the core of the catharsis of the process. If your study, you can escape your PTSD -prison to substances, working alone, thingking... You keep distance. When you go from lone world to social world, you meet triggers. They make you react in ways that hurt your adaptation and orientation. You start inderperform. And underperforming starts to cumulate. PTSD is living in flash back world. So you need many flashbacks in your story. If you start with school shooting you get repetition or you must use too few and weak flash backs. If you skip the start, you can get 3 good archs that develop together. Arch of the personal growth (theme). Arch of the bullying PTSD as an immaterial parasite being. Arch of the situational happenings (plot). PTSD is your strong and evil antagonist.
I'm wondering if you misread something—or I did? @Matthew Radecke is talking about his character getting a PhD (doctoral degree from university) not PTSD. You're right about what PTSD can be like, but I don't think that's what Matthew is writing about. Unless I misread something....
I did not. "School shooting.. ..main character among few survivors.. ..traumatic event.. character developement..” ==> PTSD. If you have a bad PTSD you can use studying as a way to keep distance to you triggers and your problems. You use studying as a place where you can hide from your PTSD. If you can handle that, you underperform only slightly. If your trauma is from school shooting AND you can study, you really must distance yourself from school reality to safe heaven of abstractions. After that you must go to real world. There you don't have a hiding place. That means that your PTSD meets its triggers more often. It ruins big parts of your possibilities. And this ruining starts to cumulate. Then you need new hides. Underperforming could be one. So you go to flip burgers with a PhD in your pocket because your PTSD cuts your ability to perform fully. It can sometimes even "help" you get your PhD faster because you escape from real life to world of abstractions. But when you leave your hiding place your life collapses. Level of performing is connected to the power of triggers. Abstract triggers are weak. Real world triggers that are connected to human interaction are powerfull. If studying does not have real world triggers or social triggers you have a safe place. Mayby you can perform most of the time like 90% of your capasity. If normal stress hits you, you can use maybe 30-70% of your mental skills. If PTSD -triggered stress hits you hard, you can use maybe 10-20% of your skills - if you really struggle. "Alf studied. He got his masters degreed. Then he studied more and got his Ph.D. Then he couldn't cope and now he flips burgers/is alcoholic/is unemployed/writes books." That sounds very much like PTSD. "Alf tried to stydy, but couldn't. So he didn't get masters degree or Ph.D." That sounds very much like PTSD. "Alf studied. Masters... Ph.D... Now he has a job that demand that Ph.D." That sounds like a bed time story that has nothing to do with PTSD. It is not PTSD if it does not effect in a hard way. And it is not PTSD if it's effect is constant. If circumstances have gigantic effect to the effect of PTSD - then it sounds like PTSD.
PTSD is a specific psychological diagnosis - not everyone who goes through a traumatic experience will suffer from PTSD.
This is 100% true. Years of blood, sweat, and tears earning your PhD doesn't mean you get your dream job right out of graduation. So the situation sounds completely believable to me.
