Q. What was the most & least valuable pieces of advice you took away from your critique?
Most valuable advice: the feedback itself. Least valuable: there’s never enough of it; and without denigrating any of the critiques not everyone is a fan of my genre.
Writing is a lonely occupation and one where it is all too easy to become persuaded of one’s own brilliance (unfortunately too often) or seized by doubts (not often enough, or at least not in a rational way: paranoid schizophrenia being all too present). More seriously, the input confirmed some of my own doubts and has given me a lot to chew on. Particularly in regard to characterisation; and the treatment of both antagonist and protagonists (Note to self: the child Lara to become Cloda’s twin and be fleshed out so that she provides a contrast with Cloda’s darker nature – but she’ll still be killed off).
More broadly it reinforced some of my own directions / doubts. (Note: some noted the use of US spellings, this is deliberate. Given the relative size of US vs Oz markets.)
Q. What changes, if any, do you plan to make to your novel following the feedback you received?
First priority: ponder and tease out the central theme; and implicit in that is the need to flesh out the main characters, especially the protagonists. They’re not going to be any less bloody-minded but need more colour.
Second, restructure Alia’s Gift to give the sub-plots more substance, especially the contrast between ‘Time Past’ (currently called Interludes) and ‘Time Present’ (main story). As presented they are ‘back’ and ‘main’ stories. They need to be better balanced, both contributing to the end-game for Alia’s Gift; noting that this is part of a larger series as well as a stand-alone novel.
I felt the group was uncomfortable with the lack of a single primary POV character to carry the story. That doesn’t suit me. (And this isn’t just Alia’s story). Rather than focusing on say Alia, Cloda or Isla, I favour the braided multi-plot / multiple character approach of Peter F. Hamilton’s Night’s Dawn and Void trilogies. Primaries can change as the story proceeds. This will require an expansion and clarification of the Interludes into interwoven and indeed parallel (and relevant) ‘Time Past’ strands.
Third, simplify the language: but not too much. For example: ‘Asaz could become ‘the Assassins’ but the use of Gaelic (Slainte etc) is a differentiator I don’t want to lose. Likewise the similarities as well as differences from ours built into this universe. (One critter noted the use of the term ‘Machiavellian’. The Prince’s Florence is also part of this parallel universe).
Q. Having both given and received novel critiques, what do you wish you’d known when the group started compared with what you know now?
It might be useful to have critters post some brief summary of their relative experience, interests and expectations in advance of a first meeting. I know that one should be able to crit outside one’s own reading preferences. But occasionally a lack of familiarity in the particular genre can grate (but the flipside of course is that differing perspectives can have a value all of their own).
Q. What advice would you give to anyone considering joining a similar group?
Join one as soon as you have a reasonably coherent work for critique; but even if you don’t the experience of critting someone else’s work is also very useful. And when on the receiving end be prepared to give careful consideration to what’s said, even when it may be quite unpalatable. You can expect input ranging from sound and measured advice through to quite gratuitous and occasionally smart-arse commentary; but it’s all grist for the mill. Suck it in and move on.
Q: What are your future plans both for the novel you submitted and other novels ‘in the works’?
Keep going or Age quod agis as the Latin tag has it! First priority will be the manifest problems in ‘Gift’ but I also need to fill in the outline of the grand story; and of course the character templates.
Q: This is your third trip through the novel critique group with Alia’s Gift, so it’s clear you see value in the process. In what format do you prefer to receive feedback (ie, verbal, written report, in-line critique etc) and why?
All of the above. Verbal is good but needs to be complemented by good round-the-table discussion. It’s best backed up by written reports which allow time for reflection (it’s really quite difficult to note-take and retain several verbal crits – I tend to jot key points for amplification / rebuttal). Best is a combination of verbal, backed up by written notes and revision-marked text. I see all these formats as a valuable ‘set’ of which I should say this final interview is a fresh and useful part.
Q: What early advice did you listen to that you believe improved your story, and what advice would you reconsider taking if you could go back in time with the experience you have now?
I think writers tend to reflect (and be limited by) their personal experience and reading preference. In my case this has involved academic (Honours / Masters and an abortive PhD attempt) and work-experience (engineer planning, military strategy and policy papers, later on Cabinet submissions and Ministerial briefing). Combined with a preference for multi-plot tech-oriented scifi (Peter F Hamilton, David Weber et al), this takes me down the track of grand (sometimes grandiose) space opera with a delight for world-building. It also makes me too prone to omniscient narration rather than character exposition.
The first crit exposed too much tendency to info dump and more focus on the global picture than individual characters. This was much ramped back in the second run but not by enough. The third has reconfirmed a tendency to inject back- at the expense of the main story. It has made me more aware of my strengths as well as manifest weaknesses. The trick now is too make use of it; noting that it’s after all my story, written to suit me. Getting published will require compromise between what I like and what some agent, editor or publicist can sell.
Finally let me record my thanks for your inputs and appreciation of your time. You are all talented writers.
David brings varied life experience to his writing (not all of which is helpful). Now living in the genteel semi-poverty of self-funded retirement, he was born in Scotland, lived in India, Germany, England and Cymru before settling in Australia; and has worked as a Merchant Navy purser, Army combat engineer and APS policy wonk.
He shares life with a long-suffering wife (what do you mean you don’t expect to get published this year? And can we talk about the garden! House needs painting!) and an (often) malevolent black cat with unionist proclivities (Listen up! Cats got rights!! This is my bloody chair! Feed me now or else!)