Hello guys. My name is Boris and i am preparing to write a story might evolve into a book and eventually publish it. I am starting from the very begging, a fresh start, page 1 of my plan. What I want to do is quite different: I want to find a partner, a writer, someone who will share the same goal as I. a person who is willing to contribute, or at least help me get going on my project. This is a serious proposal, and will be a huge responsibility. Now, about myself: I am only 19 year old, have the knowledge of all major religion in the world, and am familiar with most history. I know 3 languages (including English). Although I am very young, I have read a lot of books, watched lots of movies and documentaries about the weirdest things out there. I was only 12 years old, when a thought of writing something interesting, something to take out of my mind and share it with the world. This was just a small description, to get you into the idea why I have decided to do this project. Since I am still young I have a few advantages to this situation. I communicate with my pears, friends, classmates and the public quite often, talking about fun and interesting ideas. I think that if I combine all of my thinking into one, something great will be made. As you know writing a book is not that simple, it requires lots of time, years sometimes in fact. I want to obtain a partner who does understand the consequences, preferably has similar goals and is willing to commit at much time and power as I do. Thanks for reading.
Most history? Bold claim right there The thing about partners is that you both have to have the same desire story wise and you both need to bring something to the table. Do you have any experience in writing or anything of the sort? You'd be just lagging and slowing the whole project down without a strong basis to lead and work with another writer. If you're both starting from scratch then it'll take years, loads of learning, rewrites to get anywhere. If you have strong knowledge of how to write fiction, it would honestly take a few months if you have the time to commit at most. Without experience, it's honestly best to write by yourself and read up on the craft. No point in having to deal with another clueless person or wasting anothers who would be picking up the slack.
Boris/Korizan, I am not sure what you need a partner for. If you have the ideas and the motivation, that's 1/2 of the components needed. One needs also to make the time and have the ability to tell a story in writing. In truth, ideas for most writers isn't an issue. Most have far more than they could ever hope to write, with more on the way. External motivation, being pushed by others, is rarely effective in getting someone to finish a major work. It requires a strong dose of continued internal motivation. I will say that if you and a partner team up, have a written contract between you before you begin. What are the responsibilities of each partner? Is there a fixed timeline? Who will decide upon which publishers to submit to and remember you would each have to agree on the contract. If you self-publish, what about cover art? What is each partner expected to invest? What does each partner gain? Who 'owns' the characters, and is the partner allowed to write their own novel with those came characters or created world? And much more. Very often one partner becomes disillusioned with the project, or life interferes. This happens far more often that the duo successfully completing a novel. If one of the two quits without an agreement...it can get sticky if the other partner wants to finish...and go through with the publishing process. Not all of the work is the finishing partner's writing. Good luck as you move forward.
So it sounds like to me that you're looking for someone who is willing to critique and help you with your writing and in return you do the same for them. It sounds interesting and I would be willing to do it, but I'm not sure if I'd be the best partner for you. I am busy with school work constantly, and barely have time to write for myself. I'll think it over and get back to you if I'm interested in starting a partnership of sorts.
Something's wrong with the poll. It's not registering my vote. Anyway, Hi welcome to the forum. You're 19. You don't need a partner, you need writing classes. Actually, no it isn't. We get occasional requests for someone to do the writing (the hard part) because someone else has an idea they believe would make a good book. You may be asking for a slightly different version if you want a writing partner. But even there, we have at least one writer team on the forum. No worries, just start writing. Improve it, write some more and voilà, you become a writer. Though it takes a lot of write and re-write in between. That's what I'm doing so I speak from experience. I just passed year three and hope to be done with book one in one more year.
Just wondering was there a time when the poll would actually work? Ever since I joined the poll has never worked.
Didn't click on your poll because the answers are too generic. It could take you longer or shorter. Depends on what you're writing and your schedule. For me the first draft of a three hundred & fifty page novel takes me about three months to finish - that's first draft. The final drafts will take about two or three months if I'm satisfied. But it truly depends on your novel and what you want to accomplish. I've been working on one novel ( on and off ) since 1998 when I first thought up the idea. In 2004 I wrote a first draft. Subsequent drafts were done from 2004-to 2006. None of them I really liked with the exception of the first draft. But the idea has changed and that draft is totally useless to me. That's almost 17 years. ( I'm a person that can work on several things at once though so in between that time I have several other drafts from two other novels. ) If you're looking for someone to kinda give you feedback and keep you motivated you could always start a progress journal on here, stick around, make some friends and ask someone to beta read. Right off the bat though no one knows you so they probably won't volunteer anything. We average about twelve newbies a week and the odds of more than three sticking around past a month is pretty low. Which means someone could volunteer to read your work give you feedback and you disappear - it happens.
My own grammar's by no means perfect, so above's just everything I spotted. What I'm trying to show is: you need to brush up on your grammar or at least learn to proofread before looking for a partner. No writer worth their weight would partner up with someone whose grammar and punctuation they find dubious - it's simply too much work. Since your post was a proposal - and a serious one - you want to give a good first impression. I see you're from Canada, so very likely English is your mother tongue, which means there really isn't an excuse for the sheer amount of typos! I also highlighted two lines in bold in particular. The first - to help you get going with your project, and for what in return? If it's your project alone, then it's not your partner's. Here your request becomes muddled - are you looking for a critique partner, or are you looking for a co-author who would write a book with you? If a co-author, then it's as much their project as it is yours, and you do not get final say in what happens and how within the story. Considering this, it's not really the sorta thing you can just randomly "look for on the internet". You need someone whose writing you admire, whose writing you understand and perhaps even write similarly to, and perhaps most importantly, whose ideas mesh well with your own. To know all these things, you'll need to be familiar with that person's books and writing style. Otherwise it's unlikely to work. The second - I see you communicate with your pears I trust it was a typo, so you probably understand now why I was giggling like mad when I first read it. I sincerely hope you don't actually make a regular habit of communicating with pears I think your ambitions are sincere but perhaps unrealistic, or at least you don't show that you have sufficient knowledge of the process for any writer worth your time to partner up with you - not as co-author, certainly. I suggest you write, enjoy it, have a blast, edit and rewrite and make something you're proud of, like you believe you can and will. And after some time, after finding your style, the kinda stories you enjoy, after understanding the process a little more, then perhaps if you still want, look again for a partner then. But by partner, you need to be far more specific. Critique partner, someone to bounce ideas off, someone to proofread and edit, or an actual co-author? These boundaries can't be wishy-washy. All the best.
I'm a bit amused by the assumption that a novel must take more than a month to write. If you're busy, or have health problems or kids or other commitments (such as a full-time job, or college courses, or volunteering work) then sure, I can see it taking a long time to finish. But if you've got a few hours each day, you can get an enormous amount done in a short period of time. I have to echo the voices above me that are recommending you write and write and write some more. Practice the craft, have fun with the stories you're making, and learn to trust your unique voice as an author. If you need a motivating voice in your life, I feel certain there are people who will encourage you to set goals and work toward them. And you can get useful critiques in the Workshop, if you're willing to critique other people's work in return. (Note: you first have to critique the work of others before being allowed to post your own work there.)
It's not really an assumption for me, it's a personal fact. I don't have a lot of commitments but I can't imagine that fast. Things need to work themselves out and then I write. I'm sure plenty of people can write a story in a day. I just don't think I'm that person.
If you are cranking out novels in a month, I have serious doubts about the quality, full time writing or not.
See, this is something I don't understand. When a writer finishes a novel in three months, others are quick to reply that it's probably not very well written. If a writer finishes a novel in a month or two, then people say that the work must be bad. The thing is, a book's quality depends far more on the skill and experience of the person writing it than on the time frame it's produced in. Some writers work slowly, some work quickly. I'm just surprised that on a forum like this one, such production-discouraging myths would be propagated so readily. In particular, it seems strange that the writers who have such respect for the greats -- from Shakespeare to Dickens to Dumas, from Enid Blyton to Isaac Asimov, to still-living writers like Nora Roberts and Stephen King -- will simultaneously ignore their regular output. Agatha Christie had a book published roughly every forty days, but people will still nod sagely and tell a new writer that it just isn't possible to write a decent book in less than four months as though this is some immutable law of the universe. And I don't get it. Why is competence at speed held as a special thing that only genius can do? It's not like currently active writers can't do the same thing; I'm thinking here of modern professional genre writers who have written books under short time frames -- Sarah Hoyt, Joe Haldeman, Kristine Katherine Rusch, J.A. Konrath, S.M. Stirling, just picking a few prolific writers whose publishing time frames I'm familiar with, and ignoring primarily romance writers whose rate of output is something I can only aspire to. Even if you personally produce your best work at the rate of one novel every year or two, why would you assume that other writers must be the same way? (Particularly on a writing forum, where a far better predictor of quality is the number of works an up-and-coming writer has previously completed.)
Usually, people need time to edit and re-write a novel until it's publishable. I mean I'm sure plenty of people finished their 50,000 word minimum novel for NaNoWriMo, but I doubt it's actually done or "fully developed." If you can write quickly and well, it's a rare gift. And I think some projects just take longer than others.
You're right, and I agree, but it's like self-publishing. Most is shit but some is gold. And because of the amount that is shit the generalization holds true. While writing a book in a month can be done, most first time writers do not have the skills required and think a rough, first draft typed out 'stream of conscious' with very little thought is good enough. The generalization rings true regardless of the exceptions.
So, you found some mistakes in my shout-out. Well thanks for the feedback, I will consider everything on here, and fix my mistakes, thanks. Not trying to make excuses, but I didn’t really read what I was typing, because was too busy in other life problems, I had to post this as soon as possible. Yes I agree with all of you, grammar isn’t my strong side, but I am willing to fix it over sometime. It is very common along multi-language speakers to make grammatical mistakes; it is a fact, so I am trying my best. Now, I am here to learn, search for new idea, get help and meet new friends, so be nice to me please. About my post: I am searching for a partner, not desperately. If someone wants to join/help me and then leave, that’s fine, I have plenty of time. This is something I really want to do, so quitting is not an option. Thanks for reading.
Notice your first post that I was responding to. It suggests cranking out one novel a month is just a matter of dedicating the time. You also suggest one who can't put a book out in a month is excused if they are ill or working full time at something else. In your second post you reacted as if we'd said not a single person could ever write a book in a month. So allow me to clarify my reply. It is not the norm to write a finished book in a month. It's exceptionally rare. And the better selling authors who do so are generally cranking out commercial productions that are rarely all good books. According to interviews one finds on Google, most authors take one or more (usually more) years to write a good novel. And of those who are faster, it's more like 6 months than one month: (Bold is mine). By the way, the idea A. Christie just sat down and pounded out a new book every 40 days misses the fact she had extensive notebooks she drew from that weren't necessarily written in the same time frame as the finished novel. There are writers who pump out commercial products. This is a particular type of author and not everything they write is gold. Only a few write consistently well and usually that involves formula writing like some mystery and romance novels are. I've read some of the stuff Nora Roberts, Mary Higgins Clark and James Patterson put out that was absolute crap. Those just happen to be some of the prolific writers that I have personally read. Others like Stephen King and Dan Simmons do write consistently well.
I agree with this to a point - But we're talking about a newbie. I don't know how much these newbie know about writing. I don't even know if the newbie has read anything that didn't have the words Harry Potter in the title. I have to juggle the idea of how new is new. Do they know that a book usually isn't finished without a second or even a third draft? I felt safe in saying three months. I've read books I knew were written in a month - books I like and it can be done, never said it couldn't. But a lot of those writers are careful crafters ( pretty experienced ) and a few have been caught plagerizing ( Janet Dailey for one.) They gave their excuses ... but I truly believe it's probably because they couldn't hack the demanding schedules. Even in the 80's Sweet Valley High and eventually The Babysitter's Club plus fifty other series were written by dozens of ghost writers allowing for their once a month release because it would be VERY hard for one person to keep up that schedule. I know of only one writer who did this - Betsy Haynes - The Fabulous Five. But by the time she got to this point she'd written dozens of books. I stand by my belief that unless you're a rare or experienced writer ( who can handle a deadline ) three months is pretty standard. Heck, I thought I was being generous most writers I've read about only put out a book a year. 6 + months to write it and the remainder for the publishers to figure everything out. I won't throw the Nanowriters in the pot. I've been on that site and though there is talent on there - there is also a lot of rubbish - so to say that someone can write a BOOK in a month - technically they can. But will it be readable? I found with my experience on Nanowrite that I managed 107 pages - 1/3 of a polished first draft - and that's making my quota. I'd love to know if anyone finished Nanowrite with a 300 page story that was near-about publish ready.
GingerCoffee, I think you have made some very good points. My own background is pretty far from literary and I've been having fun following active writers' blogs, several of which show professional writers who are productive in a way I can only aspire to be. And I recognize that literary fiction is known for slower writers who try to make each of their works spectacular, which is a fine thing, but really not for everybody. I was not trying to get people's dander up. And I haven't said that everyone must write quickly, or that it's the best route. My first post was probably more pointed than it should have been, but it was aimed at Korizon, because I had gotten the impression that he was a newer writer, and I generally aim to encourage newer writers not to assume limitations where there might not be any. I don't know Korizon personally. Maybe Korizon is like a literary writer who needs five years to pen a masterpiece. Maybe he's more like William Faulkner, who famously quipped that he only wrote when inspiration struck him, but inspiration always struck at 9 o'clock each morning. Or maybe he wants to write an epic space opera, or a tale of high fantasy, or a historical fiction piece that will transport readers to an incredibly well-researched world that will take their breath away. In particular, given that the initial plan is to write a short story which might be expanded, it seems like overkill to plan out a six-month timeframe. What I got in response was the statement that a writer, even a full-time writer (which implies some amount of experience, or at least that was how I interpreted it), could not be expected to write a decent novel in a month: This is not saying "Be careful, some hastily-written stuff is bad." This is not saying, "An experienced writer knows their own strengths and weaknesses, but be cautious; a newbie writer may not be able to write at those speeds and do decent work." This is saying, bluntly, "If you write quickly, you cannot write well, and the exceptions are too rare to be worth mentioning, even in a thread started by a newbie writer, to whom we have some obligation to not mislead." My second post was more pointed. Of course it was; it was a reaction to what seemed a very simplified (to the point of incorrectness) view of what a writer's workflow must be! There are plenty of writers who let a story simmer for a while and then produce something wonderful, often after several drafts and a lot of editor feedback. And there are plenty of writers who are familiar enough with the craft of writing that they produce pretty good stuff the first time (most times; you'll still get weaker or "meh" works now and then) which can then be proofread or beta read into being a solid work. So I think people have brought up some great points (and in looking at my sources, I found I had mixed up Christie's output with that of Dame Barbara Cartland, lest anyone get the impression that I won't admit to mistakes). But I really do want to provide something of a counterweight against the "default view" that slow writing must be good and that fast writing must be bad. Because it's more complicated than that.
Just a note on communication: "I have serious doubts" is not equal to "If you write quickly, you cannot write well," But I can see why you might have read it that way.
Yeah, everyone else hit on good points. Writing really is easier as an individual process. When I say that I'm not talking about having people help edit or give input, all of that is fine. I'm talking about this partnership idea. A full-fledged partnership would likely end badly if you knew the person for years in real life, and here you are asking strangers on the internet. A fantastical view of things is great for writing and I think it will make your work interesting, just don't use it to be overly optimistic about things like this partnership idea. Sorry if this was a cynical post, I just don't want to sugarcoat the idea, it's a bad one. I'm too young and trying to write a book. During that I've decided to become active on the forums and write here on the side for the purpose of improvement. This is a great place to become a better writer, its just more gradual a process in my opinion than what you may think.
I just can't imagine writing as a partnership, but having said that, how do screenwriters do it? I often see multiple credits given to writers. And there are novels with multiple credits as well. Or are these people chapter writing?
