I know there's a bunch of edit-threads going on, but I don't wanna risk hijacking them. I'm at the point that I should start editing and working with the feedback my proofreaders (okay, just one) gave me and I haven't the slightest idea on how to do it. There are a whole bunch of things I could bother you with, and maybe I will some other time, but right now I'm most curious about this: Can you edit down two 60k stories to one 80k book without demolishing the story? I picked the 80k mark because the mighty internet tells me that's round about what to aim for in common fiction novels, though I'm not quite sure what my genre is supposed to be. I was thinking about making it a trilogy, but the third one feels like I'm pushing it for trilogy's sake and I don't think the whole thing would work as a two-parter, so I should reluctantly consider bringing it back to one story.
Depends on the story(ies). No catch-all answer. No one size fits all. I'd say though that a 40k reduction from two 60s to one 80 would be a complete teardown. Might want to boost each 60 to an 80 and have two books in that case.
I once cut an 1.5k short down to 800 words so... maybe. Depends on if you're in the habit of editing as you go, and how much of your storyline has been thought out in advance. I'd advise to list your chapters and scene with specific regard to how many birds you kill with one stone. Character and plot developmentâthey should go hand in hand. And then try to combine the larger issues, make them serve multiple purposes. It might involve a major rewrite, I'm sorry to say. ETA: I don't advocate stretching storylines for the sake of word count. If you don't have more to say, the reader would notice for sure. The one exception is description: if you aren't good at them, consider working on this skill; though it won't make much difference in terms of word count, not as much as you need.
i tend to think that a story is as long as it is... also book length is a movable feast - some are as short as 60 while 120 is not unknown... so you could either go with two 60s or combine into one and just give a light trim to come under 120
This is something that'll complicate my editing process severely. I write mostly chronologically, starting at a point which will then prompt me to write a scene that should happen next... For lack of a better description, I write out a movie I'm playing in my head, if you'll forgive me the pretentiousness. The unfortunate result is that it feels like I've written precisely what needed to be written and while cutting the odd paragraph here and there is an option, I doubt it'll put me in the word-range a publisher expects. Descriptions are something I tend to gloss over, especially since the whole thing isn't set in some description heavy fantasy world. And when I do take the time to describe it usually feels like I've stopped the story to tell you what something or someone looks like, so I'll sooner keep it brief. I agree. It takes the amount of words that it takes. But this is the first time I've conjured up something full length that has any potential and I want to maximize my chances of putting a book with my name on it on the shelf, which means - again, according to several google searches - a book should be in the 80k area. I'm expecting a publisher has more than enough reasons not to pick up my work, so I'm inclined to adhere to convention where possible.
I think you're being a bit too fearful of hitting the 80k mark. If your story works better as two 60ks, well, then that's how it works. I think you should get another beta before you make the decision. Also, I remember reading that teen books are often 60k, so if it is conceivable that your book could be shelved in teen, that could work. If not, well, some people are into shorter novels. A sci fi pulp I have that I enjoy isn't even two hundred pages. The point is to make your story as good as possible, and if it's good enough, the length is unimportant.
True. It's because I don't know what the hell I'm doing. I just thought it'd be fun to write again, which accidentally turned into something with potential (according to me, anyway) and then I find out there's all kinds of "rules" to follow. Continuing the theme set above; I also have no idea what a beta is. I'm guessing you mean a test reader? I'm not writing with any specific target audience in mind, aside from myself. And it's placed in present day (before 2020, that much is bloody certain), with present day people and present day situations. Describing it like this, my book would be shelved in "boring". Anyway, it's a roundabout way of saying I don't know what genre this should be. No wait, I've been calling this a 'hypothetical autobiography'. So there, an empty shelf with one book on. Is pulp a genre? I don't think I'd even mind to be considered pulp. Eh, we'll burn that bridge when we get there.
Writing rules are "rules." If you are entertaining, they don't matter. Lol, yes, you goober. Don't say that. Probably a lot of people write books like that. In any case, if I were you, I wouldn't worry too much about genre. "Teen" is a weird genre, because it means anything that can appeal to a specific age, but can be anything from coming of age to fantasy to even western. All I'm saying is if even the slightest possibility exists for this to not be out of place in the teen section, you might get away with it. It's not really a genre so much as a category -- the kind of book that got churned out on a regular basis back in science fiction's heyday by regular sci fi authors. Sort of like the equivalent of today's mass market paperbacks.
