Heather J. Cuthbertson

Synopses Don’t Have to Suck

2010-08-24T21:08:00.000-07:00

Synopsis.

The very word made me cringe.

For something defined as “a brief summary of the plot of a novel, motion picture, play, etc” it sure has a way of causing sleepless nights, groans of frustration, and blank-eyed confusion.

No matter how many books I read or sites I visited, I just couldn’t wrap my head around it. I’d try to keep my synopsis tight and (of course) make sense, but then I wasn’t sure what I needed to include, what I shouldn’t include, what was really important or just sort of important, and on and on.

But then I found the Holy Grail of Synopsis Writing. I stumbled on this website by complete accident and it has changed everything I’ve thought of synopsis writing. Namely, they no longer suck.

I know I’m not the only writer who has had this issue, so I thought I’d share my secret. So here we go …

All you have to do in order to write a complete, clear, and concise synopsis is to answer the following questions:

1. What is the setting? (This is really the lead-in question for the next one)
2. Who is the main character and what does s/he want?
3. What initial problem does s/he encounter?
4. How does s/he overcome his/her initial problem and achieve some measure of success?
5. What happens to spoil the initial success?
6. Where does this new problem lead?
7. What risk does the main character take to deal with this new challenge?
8. What is his/her “dark moment?”
9. How does s/he overcome this last obstacle to achieve the outcome of the story?
10. How does it end? Happily ever after? What’s changed?

When I’m writing a synopsis, I will list these questions, answer them, and erase them when I’m done. And then Voila! I have a concise and to-the-point synopsis. There are some other rules to remember when writing your synopsis:

1. Keep it single spaced and to about a page.
2. Write in present tense.
3. Use all caps when you first introduce your main characters (LITTLE RED RIDING HOOD walks through the woods and she meets the BIG BAD WOLF). This is a one-time thing.
4. Keep all other characters outside your main characters to a minimum. Even though Aunt Em and Uncle Henry were important to Dorothy. In your synopsis, they are just Dorothy’s aunt and uncle. Capice?

I took the above method from the Top Ten Questions for a Successful Synopsis by Gina Ardito, a romance writer, but tweaked it a bit so I could use it for my manuscripts. If you’re writing a romance, i.e. paranormal romance (I know you’re out there), you might want to go to her website and use the questions she has listed. I know I will when my YA paranormal romance is ever ready to go.

Check out Gina Ardito’s website at http://www.ginaardito.com/.

I See You Blog

2010-08-21T11:53:00.000-07:00

My blog has totally been neglected. It’s becoming that “one” thing I started and now it just sort of stares at me from the window when I’m trying to watch T.V.—a little creepy.

I really have no excuse. Busy? Yes. I just went to a writer’s conference at the beginning of the month, got a ton of requests, and now I’ve been revising like crazy—tweaking this, tweaking that.

I’ve still been reading some YA bestsellers. Speaking of YA bestsellers, I’m so excited for Mockingjay (third book in the Hunger Games series). I’ve already preordered and been religiously checking the countdown (4DAYS!!! This is worse than Christmas morning). I’ve stayed away from all forums talking about the last book. I have my own predictions, but want to be surprised. Anyone else sitting on pins and needles?

Heist Society: Ally Carter

2010-05-25T10:52:00.000-07:00

Heist Society was fun, fast paced, and exciting.

I’m always amazed (and a little jealous) when authors or screenwriters are able to come up with innovative ways to make an impossible task possible (like robbing a casino in Oceans 11). Heist Society was along this same vein when Ally Carter had to come up with a plan for her main character, Katarina Bishop, to take on the Henley Museum.

Heist Society was all about the obstacles. That being said, Carter did an excellent job of demonstrating how to put obstacles between the protagonist and his or her goal.

For instance, Kat’s main goal was to re-steal five paintings for mobster, Arturo Taccone, to save her dad:

1. The paintings were in the most secured museum in the world—the Henley.
2. The one person (Kat’s uncle), who could most likely pull off the heist, refused to help.
3. The other person (Kat’s dad) was unable to help.
4. Kat didn't have enough people in her crew to pull off the job.
5. Carter threw in an ethical obstacle about stealing the paintings in general.
6. But if Kat didn't succeed, then Arturo would kill her dad.

Aside from these obstacles, Carter established an overarching obstacle to the story: Kat wanted out of a life of thieving. Of course, other obstacles prevented that from happening.

I attended a presentation once where the speaker said a writers job was to put as many obstacles as possible between the main characters and their intended goals. The prize should never come easy for them.

I think Heist Society is a good example of creating obstacles—tons of them.

You don’t need to stop with direct obstacles (such as obstacles that prevent the character from physically attaining what they want), but personal obstacles, ethical obstacles, etc. Ultimately, obstacles create conflict and we really can’t have too much of that.

Where's the Book Reviews????

2010-04-21T13:29:00.000-07:00

I haven’t posted anything in quite awhile … obviously.

But the good news is that I finally applied to graduate school for an MFA in Creative Writing! I’m very excited to hear if I’ve been accepted and even more excited to get started in the program (assuming I’m accepted). I took a lot of time writing my essays so I haven’t been reading as much. I did finish one of the books on my list and I am nearly done with another.

I’m looking forward to getting back to my YA bestsellers and posting why I think they’re awesome!

Incarceron: Catherine Fisher

2010-03-23T18:40:00.000-07:00

Incarceron was a trip. It was a little slow to get into, but once I was in, I was hooked. When I mean slow, it wasn’t that it had too little action or too much narration. It was because there was a lot of sci-fi, alternate world stuff going on that was a little hard to follow at first—at least for me. It might be completely different for someone else.

But, like I said, Incarceron was a trip. Fans of Hunger Games might want to give it a try. They are completely different stories, of course, but have the same sort of vibe.

And like Hunger Games, Incarceron was a best seller because of it’s …

High Stakes

Think Shawshank Redemption, but on crack. Try breaking out of a prison that’s alive, doesn’t want you to leave, and can kill you at whim. Talk about stacking the deck.

Here’s how Fisher did it:

1. Finn aka Giles (the lost prince) finds a key and believes it’s his means to escape Incarceron.
2. He gets help from the outside, the Warden’s daughter, Claudia, who has been looking for the entrance for Incarceron her whole life, not to mention the lost prince, and has never found either.
3. The prison doesn’t want Finn/Giles to leave and leaving isn’t that easy when Incarceron is smaller than an ice cube.

I really liked the imaginative world that Catherine Fisher created. With every page, she left me wondering what will the prison do next and what “really” is Incarceron. Even though the prison was a larger-than-life place, all the work it took to develop it would have been meaningless without the stakes that Fisher created.

I think Incarceron is a good example of a balance between world-building and plot. Fisher was able to blend both perfectly and, in doing so, she crafted an engaging and enjoying story while at the same time showing us a crazy world within worlds.

For those of us that want to recreate the same in our own manuscripts, it’s important to remember that too much focus on world-building without the same amount of attention on the plot will end up destroying both efforts.

Shiver: Maggie Stiefvater

2010-03-15T09:49:00.000-07:00

I was super excited when I heard a rumor that Shiver wasn’t a series and that I’d actually get some closure from a YA book, especially a YA paranormal romance. It was a complete psych-out and book number two, Linger, will be coming out July 20, 2010.

Shiver is another paranormal romance that has risen to bestseller status. On a side note, I really liked the atmosphere of the story. It felt cold. Weather played a big part and Stiefvater did a good job of making "temperature" just as salient as the characters and the setting.

Even so, I don’t think Stiefvater’s ability to bring out details was the reason it was a bestseller. However, she did do one thing that I have yet to see in other paranormal romance. Whether or not it is the reason for its popularity is debatable, but it’s worth mentioning.

What separated Shiver from other paranormal romance was because of it’s ….

Point of View

Shiver was from the viewpoint of both love interests (the wolf-boy and the girl) in the first person. This is no easy feat, but because Stiefvater was able to pull it off, it provided a greater depth to the characters. We were able to see the world from their eyes and the eyes of others.

There really is no “how she did” type of explanation, but I think if this is going to be replicated certain rules will have to be adhered.

1. Who?

a. You must clearly write out who is taking the lead. Make it blatantly obvious. The reader must know right away whose head they are in or they will only get confused.
b. Stiefvator titled each chapter with the name of the character. It wasn’t fancy, but it worked and left no room for confusion.

2. Voice

a. Character voice is going to be really important. Readers are going to figure out right away if the boy and the girl sound exactly the same. I doubt the reaction will be good.
b. Stiefvator used little things about the characters to separate them. For example, Sam was a musician and he’d break out in lyrics, making his voice guyish. Grace would worry and ruminate, making her voice sound girly.

I liked Shiver’s point of view and I think Stiefvater skillfully handled it. Something like this could easily unravel. It’s really important in working with dual point of views to make the voices and POV completely clear to the reader or you’ll lose them.

Beautiful Creatures: Kami Garcia & Margaret Stohl

2010-03-08T12:05:00.000-08:00

The first thing I noticed about Beautiful Creatures was how thick it was. In a world of edit, edit, edit, it was surprisingly fat. Instead of bogging down, I think the chunkiness gave the book some of its charm. It forced me to enjoy the story and not rush to the finish line to know “what happens.”

Apparently, I was not the only one and Beautiful Creatures was able to plop its beefy butt on the bestseller list.

Here was why:

Characters

This story was all about the characters… getting to know them, loving them, and rooting for them. It was a love story, in an old school kind of way, and its enchantment was not so much the magic, but the way the characters related to each other, their families, and their community.

Here’s how Garcia and Stohl did it:

1. Both love interests felt incomplete and lonely until they meet.
2. Numerous obstacles try to keep the lovers apart.
3. The lovers create obstacles by trying to stay together.
4. In the end, love conquers all with the promise that more obstacles are on the way.

Like I said, this is an “old school” love story where the characters have to sacrifice to be together. From a writers perspective, Beautiful Creatures is a good example that we can still break the rules, write like we want to write, tell the story in our own time and pace, and still be successful … just as long as we have the characters to sustain it.

Witch & Wizard: James Patterson

2010-03-02T10:50:00.000-08:00

When I think of James Patterson, I think of Along Came a Spider and Kiss the Girls. I have to admit, I have never read one of Patterson’s books until now. I wasn’t disappointed.

I think what made Witch & Wizard a bestseller was because of its ...

Pacing.

Sch-zaam! This book didn’t have legs; it had wheels. It was like being punched in the face every time I turned the page.

Witch & Wizard worked because once you started it, Patterson forced you to continue with the next page and the next. I think readers automatically look for natural breaks in a story to stop reading. Witch & Wizard does not give you that opportunity.

Here’s how Patterson did it:

1. The story opened with immediate action.
2. Something happened on every page.
3. There were no lulls, no reflections, no breathers (unless it was like a minute) before the action continued.

As opposed to some of my other book reviews, I believe Patterson’s writing style made Witch & Wizard a hit. I don’t know if Patterson outlined his story, but I think this book would be a good example of how to outline. Patterson stuck with whatever plan he created without going off on tangents and bogging down the reader. Witch & Wizard was impossible to put down. And isn’t that the point of being a writer … creating a story that can’t leave the readers hands? Outlining before you write is a good way to achieve the same results.

Monthly Trend Alert

2010-02-25T14:52:00.000-08:00

After reading several bestsellers and perusing the bestseller lists, I couldn’t help but notice a subtle pattern emerging. It’s plain to see that paranormal romance is maintaining its stronghold in the publishing world, but …

there has been a change.

The reign of the vampire seems to be ending—at least for now. Instead, paranormal romance is going into another direction and tapping into other baddies like fallen angels, witches, werewolves, and even zombies (so I hear).

So if you have a paranormal romance involving Big Foot or the Loch Ness monster, now is your time to blow the dust off and get it out there before the market changes course once again.

Fallen: Lauren Kate

2010-02-22T13:46:00.000-08:00

Bestseller aside, I really liked this book. For how thick it was, I finished reading it fairly fast. At any rate, it was easy to see what made Fallen so popular because of one reason:

New Twist on an Old Idea

Kate could have easily made her main character a sweet and innocent girl that just-so-happens to draw the attention of the fallen angel, but she didn’t do that (thank goodness!). Instead, her main character is about one more mishap away from being institutionalized (prison, mental hospital … it’s really up in the air).

A second point is that Kate designed her book to be just as much of a mystery as it is a paranormal romance. This helped propel the plot and gave the reader something to chew over once obsessed ruminations of the love interest got old.

Here’s how Kate did it:

1. The main character, Luce, was involved in a mysterious death.

2. Luce is then sent to a reform school full of mysteriously weird kids.

3. Luce finds herself, once again, involved in another mysterious death.
4. Death seems to follow once Luce starts to unravel the truth, pieces of it anyway, behind the kids at the school.

Ironically enough, I’m also writing a paranormal romance (hey, who isn’t?) and I think Fallen was one of the best books so far to show me how to bring a fresh perspective to the market. Kate not only had the romance element, but there was the seriously flawed main character, the mystery, the love triangle, etc. It added a lot of depth to her story compared to other paranormal romance out there and will be, at least for me, something that I’m going to add in my own fledgling manuscript.

Catching Fire: Suzanne Collins

2010-02-18T11:09:00.000-08:00

After reading The Hunger Games, there was no possible way I’d pass up Catching Fire. And for the record, I’m going to be pulling out my hair until Mockingjay (third book in Hunger Games series) comes out in August. By the time it’s released, I’ll be bald.

Anyway, back to business.

With all the YA bestsellers I’ve been reading lately, I couldn’t help but notice that a lot of them are series. That’s good news if you’re shopping around one book, hoping that it could possibly turn into more, but it makes reviewing them a little bit harder. One some level, Catching Fire was popular because of its equally popular predecessor, but it could have just as easily bombed out.

Of course, this wasn’t the case with Catching Fire. And just like before, it was a bestseller because of its continuing high stakes.

Here was how Collins did it:

1. You’d think that the main characters were in the clear after winning the Hunger Games, but they were not.
2. The Capitol decides on an All-Stars style of the Hunger Games where winners of previous years fight to the death, throwing the two main characters back in the ring
3. It’s not enough that the main characters have to fight to stay alive, but now they have to worry about the safety of their loved ones while districts revolt.

I think it was easy to see in Catching Fire that Suzanne Collins expanded the stakes from a personal level (just the main characters) to include the community (immediate family or family and friends). I suspect that in Mockinjay, the high stakes will ripple out to include the entire world, so to speak, in the grand finale.

For series writers or those that want their novel to metamorphosis into other books, Catching Fire is a good example that we should be thinking of making the problems bigger and the conflict thicker for our original characters without forgetting about raising the emotional stakes, such as throwing their loved ones right in the boiling pot with them.

Hush, Hush: Becca Fitzpatrick

2010-02-08T13:31:00.000-08:00

With the megaton of YA paranormal romance out there, I was interested in figuring out what separated Hush, Hush from the rest. Undoubtedly, it had some bestselling kernel nestled in its pages, setting it apart from its numerous contenders, and I was on a mission to find it.

Without further ado, I believe what made Hush, Hush a bestseller was because ….

Characters that Rang True

Let’s be realistic, it’s hard not to be attracted to an otherworldly person when they are attracted to you. I would almost say that it’s nearly impossible. But despite what I believe to be a fundamental truth, Becca Fitzgerald used the whole “bad boy” persona to knock the appeal factor into double digits.

So this is how Fitzpatrick did it:

1. The love interest is a fallen angel (the ultimate bad boy).
2. The main character falls for said bad boy and sacrifices herself for him (the “I’ll change him” phenomena).
3. The bad boy transforms into an “almost” good guy and gets his wings back (the ultimate goal for a girl that falls for a bad boy).

As far as romance, Hush, Hush teaches us the importance of hitting all the right spots on a psychological level. It doesn’t matter how otherworldly our characters are if they don’t ring true to real life. They must connect to us on a level we understand, such as the idea of a bad boy. And why do we love bad boys? Maybe it’s a rebellion thing. Maybe it’s a “we’ll change him” thing. Who knows? It just works.

The Hunger Games: Suzanne Collins

2010-02-01T15:03:00.000-08:00

So, I finished reading The Hunger Games over the weekend. If this were any other book review, I’d go on about its virtues (and, trust me, there’s quite a few), but I really don’t care about that. What I really want to know was what made the book tick? What gave it the edge? You see, I, too, dream of reaching that coveted bestseller list one day and if I have to dig in and rip out the beating heart of The Hunger Games—literally speaking, of course—to find its bestselling ingredient, well, so be it.

And here’s what I found.

The number one reason why The Hunger Games was a bestseller, in my most humble opinion, was because ...

Drum roll please ...

High Stakes

I’m sorry, but putting kids in an arena to kill each other ups the ante to a whole new level. It also adds an unsettling factor. It was cool with Arnold Schwarzenegger in Running Man, but kids? Really? It brings back images of Lord of the Flies, which left me uncomfortable even then.

Of course, we all know that The Hunger Games wouldn’t have been nearly as appealing without its memorable characters, but without the stakes that Collins presented it just wouldn’t had been the same book or, in my opinion, had the same appeal.

So this is how she did it:

1. The Hunger Games had only one winner—everyone else dies.
2. The two main characters weren’t even considered contenders at first. The assumption was that they’d just die in the initial scramble.
3. Knowing this, Collins developed relationships between the characters even though the relationships were doomed because ...
4) All the characters wanted to stay alive, which is one of the most fundamental human drives.

In the end, what does The Hunger Games teach us? If we want to be the next bestseller, we need to keep raising the stakes. If it seems dire, make it dreadful. If it seems dreadful, make it cataclysmic. If it seems cataclysmic, make it … well, you get the idea.