Novel Writing Intensive, October 2016

Registration is now open for my 7th Novel Writing Intensive Retreat, with New York Times bestselling author, Robert Dugoni. This is an in-depth, intensive time of teaching and study on the craft of novel writing. For more information, visit the NWI website.

Since this is my first draft, should I simply write the story out and go back and add/drop scenes as needed?

People often ask me questions regarding my writing style, process, etc. Whenever we talk about writing, there is process and there are principles. While the principles for storytelling are relatively universal, the process will vary from person to person and also, at least in my experience, from book to book.

Some people outline and “plot out” their stories and others listen to the story as they write each day, feeling out the direction of the story organically. Since I’ve described the organic writing process in other posts, let’s not go there for now. You can go back and read those posts later. But no matter your process, I think it is important to write the ideas you have when they are fresh in your mind—even if they are not specifically chronological.

When I’m working on a story, I might know that in a certain place in my book my detective will visit a crime scene and notice what no one else notices, but it might take me weeks or months to figure out exactly what that is. So in the meantime, while I wait for just the right inspiration, I write obligatory scenes that the story and the genre dictate.

For example, in the book I’m currently writing, I’m about 80 or 90% done, but I have no clear idea about how the climax will play out. As I’ve written, I’ve worked on scenes that I knew I was going to include, and some transitions or interludes between the scenes themselves. In some cases I know that something must be altered—or tilt as I sometimes think of it—but I’m not sure exactly what that is. But it will come if I continue to look at context and press the right questions against the fabric of the story. So, as I now add those scenes and transitions, I can look at the story as a whole and that will lead me to just the right climax and ending.

To summarize, I believe it’s best to pursue your ideas where they take you. Write yourself into a corner as much as you can and then find a way out your readers would never expect. Keep moving through the story, sometimes that will mean moving ahead without figuring exactly what will happen in a scene and then dropping the scenes in later, sometimes it’ll mean you figure them out as you move along. Be flexible. Be open. And keep an ear out for what the story is trying to tell you.

Q & A's about Organic Writing (Post 1)

With the release of my book STORY TRUMPS STRUCTURE, I thought I would devote the next two posts to excerpts from the Q & A section on organic writing. Here you go!

Q - “Why do you need to write the whole story organically instead of plotting it out? Why can’t you just use this process as you’re outlining it?”

A - It takes time to get to know characters and allow them the freedom to respond to the situations you present to them in the story.

Also, you’ll only know the narrative weight of scenes after you’ve written them and studied them in context. There’s no practical way to do this when outlining.

Finally, if you’re not surprised by the twists in the story and the direction that it takes as you’re writing it, it’s likely many of your readers won’t be either as they’re reading it. It might take me six months of thinking about how to resolve a certain plot question as I’m working on the novel before I come up with a workable solution. I’m nowhere near smart enough to solve all of those plot problems before I get started. And unless you’re a prodigy or a creative genius, you probably aren’t either.

Q - “But if you don’t outline, how do you know how long your book will be?”

A - I don’t. I can’t know how many words my book will have until I’ve uncovered the story.

I might know some general ideas based on the genre, number of point-of-view characters, the complexity of the plot and so on, but novels are not sitcoms. The art form allows us freedom that those who are constricted to a twenty-two minute time limit don’t have. Don’t let a predetermined word-count handcuff you and interfere with telling the story that needs to be told.

Q - “But won’t I have to go through more edits if I write organically? Won’t it take me fewer drafts if I outline?”

A - There seems to be an impression out there that writing a novel organically takes longer than writing one using an outline. Some people outline their books and go through dozens of drafts; some people write organically and hardly have to edit the manuscript at all. Some of it is skill, artistry, intuition.

Writing great fiction takes a lot of time no matter how you approach it. I’ve had a number of professional novelists confess to me that the more they write the less they outline, simply because they don’t have time to write detailed outlines and still meet their deadlines.

Writing organically doesn’t mean approaching a story with a blank slate in your brain—you know about story, about genre conventions and reader expectations. If you’re writing a series, you’ve made promises in previous books that readers will look forward to finding payoff for in the book you’re working on.

If you ask the right questions and let the story continually unfold before you by letting the narrative forces press in upon it, you’ll be able to write the story much quicker than if you were to outline it and then have to make edits because there are continuity or causality problems.

Do You Use Beta Readers (extra pairs of eyes on your manuscript)?

My question for you is regarding 'beta readers.' I have found that as your story evolves as you write organically, minor things may change, and there may be inconsistencies that can be overlooked. Example, John Smith is a vegan. Later in the story, after several rewrites, he takes his wife out for BBQ dinner because it is pivotal to the newly written scene. While minor within the crux of the story, to the reader it would seem like a billboard (with them asking, how did the author miss this?).

So do you use beta readers? If so, how many are in your pool? And do you take their advice? Seems that everyone has an opinion of how they would have written the story. But I feel if I completely entertain their ideas, it is no longer my story.

This question brings several issues to mind for me—internal consistency, self-editing, and working with the advice of beta readers and editors.

First, you’re absolutely right that snags such as the one you listed regarding the vegan who ends up taking his wife out for BBQ would jar readers and knock them out of the story. As I edit scenes and shape new ones, I often find myself going back to make sure that I’ve tackled those kinds of glitches.

Still, mistakes can creep in. I remember one character who appeared in several of my Patrick Bowers novels being in his mid-seventies in one book and then about a decade younger in the next book. Oops. Since it was a mistake that spanned two books it was easier to miss. But still, astute readers might have noticed it if they read the books within a close time frame.

Second, self-editing. The first and most important eyes you will have on your manuscript are your own. Catching those minor glitches and mistakes is ultimately your job, no matter how many editors and readers you may have. To make sure I’ve caught those, I need to read through the whole book, usually in one day to make sure all of it is fresh in my mind.

With my latest suspense novel BLUR, I noticed that one character was listed as a wide receiver, and then later as a tight end. No readers or editors caught this and it was only on my final pass through the book that I noticed it. Don’t rely on anyone else to fact check. Readers will always blame you, and rightly so, if they find mistakes.

Finally, readers and editors. I do my best to take their comments and queries to heart, but I don’t make all the changes they suggest. Often they don’t realize that you’ve thought about the same idea months ago and discarded it because of the context or the movement of the story.

I usually give them a list of specific things I’d like them to look for in the book. For example, I give one copy to someone in law enforcement and have him look at the cop lingo, things like that. I usually choose someone to look at story flow, another at grammar, and so on.

This is your baby and, just like having a baby of your own, you’ll get lots of advice about how to raise it. In the end, you have to take all of it with a grain of salt and raise your child your way.

I have heard from multiple publishers the same line: They enjoyed my submission, but it isn't marketable. I recently had a smaller publisher say that I wrote an entertaining story but it isn't worthy of critical acclaim and that more or less makes me a “B List Author” and they are unable to publish my work. My question is, when is it time to hang up the hat? Do I stop trying to submit my work (it's a sci-fi and there are not many sci-fi publishers)? Do I try to self publish? Is self publishing ever a good idea? Do I give up on writing altogether? (I am not a fan of being labeled a "B List Author," but I digress.)

First of all, I wouldn’t be a fan of being called a “B List Author” either. It seems like an outrageous thing for a publisher to tell anyone. But keep in mind, it’s just one obviously jaded editor on one day.

Remember that publishers only make money when they purchase manuscripts that they think they can sell. Period. They aren’t going to take on a project they personally like but they don’t think can make money. So, their feedback is helpful for you.

That said, I would follow up with a letter to the editor thanking them for the time and input and asking what would have made the book more marketable? Tell them you are looking to rework the manuscript and would appreciate any feedback they can offer. Some won’t reply, but some likely will. Take their comments to heart and as a gift to you to help improve your story.

Years ago, I had a book proposal that was rejected by about 20 publishers. I reworked it, taking their comments and reasons for rejection into account to make the book better, and then finally sold it.

As far as “hanging up your hat,” I really can’t say. However, remember that if the book isn’t marketable to a traditional publisher who has a marketing team that knows your market, it won’t likely be any more marketable if it’s self-published.

And, it’ll only be more difficult to sell to consumers since (1) you don’t have the marketing experience that a publisher has, (2) you don’t have the contacts they have in bookstores, (3) you may not know the market as well as they do.

For all authors—traditionally published or self-published—the key is producing stories that entertain readers, and then connecting with those readers so that they discover you. If you’re convinced you have done the first and that you can do the second all on your own, then perhaps self-publishing will work. Otherwise, rework your story so that it’s marketable, or move on to another project or career.

International Thriller Writers On-line Craft School

I am honored that I was asked to be one of the teachers for the International Thriller Writers On-line Craft School. This is a great opportunity for any writer, especially a thriller writer, to take advantage of...without having to go all the way to New York City for Thrillerfest.

Check it out: International Thriller Writers On-line Craft School

As an organic writer, how do you approach research? I find I learn things off research that become major story elements, and yet, I have no idea what to research until I start writing the story.

I find that research and writing feed off each other. Early on in my work on a book, I’ll visit the location and keep my eyes open for things that grab my attention. I do this with the premise of the story in mind.

Never lose sight of the story’s preeminence in the balance of research and narrative. It’s easy to wow people with facts. Emotionally moving them with the story is the much more vital--and more difficult--task.

For example, while I was working on my current manuscript for Checkmate, I knew that I wanted to plant the story in Charlotte, North Carolina. So, last year I visited the city and took a history tour. While I was there, I learned that there are abandoned gold mines that thread underneath Uptown Charlotte. No one seemed to know where they were, but apparently they’d been built in the early 1800s and were never filled in.

Fascinating. That led me into researching to see if I could locate any historical documents that told the location of the mines—and I found one. Then, as I worked on the book, I kept in touch with experts on the history of Charlotte, asking questions as I moved forward with the story.

It’s a give and take of uncovering the story as you discover more about its elements. You’ll be tempted to over-research—and that has happened with me. I believe it’s best to work from your premise, grab hold of intriguing facts that relate to it, then move forward and keep researching as you write.

The Seven (Bad) Habits of Highly Effective Writers

Steven is out of town, so I (his office manager) am taking over the Ask the Author post for the day. I won't be answering any of your questions, but I do want to direct you to an article that every aspiring (and published) author should read.

One of the best ways to become an effective writer is to learn through other authors' blunders and gaffes. So here's your chance. Click on the link to the Suspense Magazine article Steven was asked to contribute to called "The Seven (Bad) Habits of Highly Effective Writers." I think you'll find it highly enlightening.

(Permission was granted to link to the article by its author, Anthony J. Franze.)

Steven will return to answer more of your questions after he's past the three book deadlines that have chomped at his heels the past two months.

Until then, Happy Writing!

Novel Writing Intensive Retreat 2013

Many people ask me what to do after they’ve finished a manuscript and think it’s at a point where they can’t improve it any more, but know it’s not quite ready to send to an agent or acquisitions editor. If that’s you, the Novel Writing Intensive Retreat in October might be just what you need. This will be my third time leading this retreat, but this year I’ll be teaching with nationally-known writing instructor and accomplished novelist Robert Dugoni. In addition to detailed individualized manuscript critiques, during the four day intensive, you’ll receive 8 hours of classroom instruction, 10 hours of interactive small group instruction, an extensive handbook on writing, a 100-point novel writing checklist, all meals, lodging, and much more. Visit the website to find out the details and specifics. This event is first-come, first-served, and because of the individual attention, we can only accept ten attendees. I hope to see you there.

Since you don't outline, how thoroughly do you plan out your characters and story before you begin the first draft? Do you do much more than superficially edit as you go?

I get a lot of questions about outlining and organic writing. I’m not sure why people are taught to outline as if it is the right way or the only way to write. It’s such an unnatural approach to the creative that I really don’t understand how or why people go that route.

So, to address these two specific questions, I don’t plan out my characters very thoroughly at all. Instead, I put them in interesting situations and see how they respond. Sometimes they’ll surprise me in how they act or demand a bigger part in the story, so I try to be honest and let them be.

This approach is similar to the way that JRR Tolkien wrote. As he noted one time, "A new character has come on the scene (I am sure I did not invent him, I did not even want him, but there he came walking through the woods of Ithilien): Faramir, the brother of Boromir."

Tessa did this to me in The Pawn. At first she was a rather one-dimensional snide teen girl, but the more I wrote about her, the more interesting she became. By the time I started working on The Rook, she had vied for a bigger part in the story and I had to give it to her.

The key is responding to the story as it unfolds, being honest, keeping it believable, letting the characters act and develop naturally, and go where the thread of the story takes you.

As far as the second question about editing, I continually revise and edit as I go along. Typically I will print out several chapters that I’ve been working on, as well as the new ones I’m writing, and read them through to start my day. I will edit them, rewrite them and tweak them as the broader context of the story becomes clearer.

So, allow your characters the opportunity to flex and adapt and grow, adding quirks and inconsistencies, pushing them to the limit to see how they respond, and then letting the story shape them even while they shape the direction of the story.

Can you share some insight on how best to determine when to stop doing research? How much is enough? It's so fascinating to learn more, I could keep going forever it seems!

Over-researching a novel is common, and it’s an easy trap to fall into. It happened to me when I was writing Placebo.

I was researching quantum mechanics so that I could render that part of the storyline, and finally I realized that I’d read more than enough books, watched more than enough documentaries, and visited more than enough quantum mechanics websites to last a lifetime. I remember stopping in the middle of a book, just shaking my head.

I’d gotten sucked into doing the very thing I’ve warned aspiring novelists not to do. That’s not the only time it’s happened, but it was the most recent and the most jarring.

So, how do we avoid that? When can we tell if we’ve done enough research? Here are three guidelines. Remember:

1. You’re writing a novel and not a research paper. Story matters more than anything. Readers aren’t coming to your book for information, but for entertainment. Resist the urge to show off how much you know—or how familiar you’ve become with Wikipedia. Yes, you’ll want to get the details right, but you don’t have to become an expert on every aspect of your tale—you just have to know the people who are. Brain-picking is not only essential, it’s also fun.

2. Research is an ongoing process that needs to happen while we write our novels, not beforehand. As we write, we will always come up with questions and have to go back to the Internet, the library, or the expert that we dug up somewhere to verify information. Don’t look at research as a separate part of the writing process or as something that precedes it, but rather as something that parallels it.

3. Believability trumps accuracy. In other words, as long as we can come up with a stunning believable scene that even those who are experts in the field would accept, we don’t have to make the events possible, accurate, or well-researched.

I usually visit the location that my novel is set in early in my writing process. Then, when the story has taken shape, I will usually go back to the location again to fact check what I need to in order to nail down the details, the drive times, the sunset and sunrise, and things of that nature.

If you ever start wondering if you’re researching too much, you are. Put all of that aside and get working on your story.

Is it better to start a novel with a fast pace and suspense or a slower pace with more background information?

The answer to this question might seem obvious at first—well, you want the story to start in an exciting and gripping way, I mean, otherwise won’t people get bored? You need to hook your readers’ attention, right?

Once I was at a writers conference and a woman gave me her manuscript to look at. The opening was an exciting car chase that really grabbed my attention. It ended with a car crash, and I said, “So this is an action story?” But she shook her head. “It’s a romance. After she gets to the hospital she falls in love with her doctor.”

Now, in a sense when you set out to write a book you’re making a contract with your readers that you are going to entertain them, that you’re going to fulfill or exceed their expectations, and that you’re not going to cheat. I told the woman, “Well if that’s the case, then you just broke your promise because the beginning of the book promises me that it’s going to be action-packed.” She looked exasperated. “My writers critique group told me I needed to have a more exciting hook.”

Many aspiring writers (and even accomplished ones, unfortunately) listen to this advice about a great hook and they start their stories with an exciting opening, but then they have to slow the story down to a snail’s pace to fill readers in on what’s going on and why.

On the other hand, you don’t want to start at a slow pace and dump background information on your reader. So, here are a couple of principles that I keep in mind when I’m shaping the openings to my stories.

(1) The length of the hook is determined by the length of the book. This means that if I’m writing a 500 page novel I don’t need to be clever in the first line or two. Readers will understand that there’s a lot of story to tell and they will give me some space to set up the story. I try not to rush the opening, but set it up to serve the story as a whole.

(2) The opening must not just grab readers’ attention, but must also introduce them to a character they care about, help them picture the story world, and introduce the mood, voice, pace and genre of the story.

(3) Escalation is just as important to a story as the opening scene, or hook, is. If I start a story in an exciting way and then drop way back to fill in the background information, I’ve brought the story’s pace to a grinding halt. I can’t do this if I want to keep readers flipping pages. So, however I start the story, I need to orient the readers to the story at a place where I can quickly escalate the story and propel it forward toward its eventual climax.

So, writing an effective story opening has many facets and if any of them are dropped out, the story will suffer. Grab the attention of the readers, help them see what’s happening, introduce a character we can identify with or aspire to be like, give us a feel for the mood, set the readers expectations in the right place for the story arc you’re working with, and then get on with it. Don’t stall out giving too much background info. Press forward, fulfill your promises, and leave your readers hungry for more.

The Patrick Bowers series has a beautiful combination of action, thrill, and compelling story. How do you find this balance? What advice can you give to writers who struggle keeping their story moving without getting to the end result too quickly?

First of all, thanks for the kind words about the series. I really appreciate them. Glad you enjoy the series.

So, you ask a good question: how do we maintain a balance between action and suspense while keeping the story moving and not ending it prematurely?

Stories are built on promises. These can come in many forms: comedic, dramatic, horrific, etc. For example, if we start a story showing a woman in an ideal marriage with a husband who loves her and she’s satisfied and at peace, we’ve made a promise to readers: something is going to go wrong and disrupt her idyllic life. Perhaps her husband will die, or succumb to his old addiction to alcohol, or leave her, or have an affair. Something will throw things out of balance. If you drag it on too long before keeping the promise you’ve made, readers will get bored and annoyed.  

You can make a promise by showing how blissful things are, or how unbalanced they are to begin with. So, we could have the daughter of a congressman get abducted—it’s a promise that the authorities will be in a race against time to save her.

One of the keys to storytelling is making promises that matter and then keeping them when the readers expect them to be kept. Suspense is really the drawing out of a promise of peril to a character whom we care about. It’s that apprehension we feel about impending danger. Action is what happens during the fulfillment of that promise. The action escalates to a climactic moment that drives the story forward into the next scene. Remember that in the interludes between scenes you will either need to keep a promise or make one.

A story ends when there’s no logical place for it to go based on the promises that have preceded that moment in the tale. If we make promises and don’t keep them, it’s likely that readers will feel frustrated at the end of the story. If we drag out a story after all the promises have been kept, readers will get bored.

So, as you analyze your story, ask yourself about those promises—have you made big enough ones on which to build a story? Have you kept the promises in ways that surprise readers and still please them? Have you done so at a time and in a way that will make readers clamor for your next book? You’ll need to stop and ask these questions throughout your writing process, but if you do, in the end you’ll have a well balanced story.

What do you do when you're writing a book that you want to be a full-sized novel when you're done, but while you're writing it you realize that you're not going to make it to that many words?

This is a common question that comes up at writers’ conferences—it seems that it’s not that unusual of a problem. The main thing to remember is to not add words for the sake of adding words.

Readers are much more interested in an engaging and well-told story than they are with word count. And now with the emergence of e-readers, length is becoming less and less of a concern for publishers. 

Genre affects reader expectations about length. Generally, literary novels, romance and young adult fiction can get away with being shorter. Complex historicals, thrillers, fantasy, and science fiction are typically longer.

As a rule of thumb, I’d suggest that if your story is fewer than 30,000 words you call it a short story. If it’s between 30,000 and 60,000 call it a novella. From there on up, most people will consider it a novel. Most novels don’t exceed 130,000 (although several of mine have); beyond that the story might realistically be broken into two 375 pages books.

I’ve never had to work through having to add words myself (usually I’m trying to reduce my word count), but here are my thoughts about it if you feel the need to add to your story.

(1) Be concise. Make every word count. If you can make your story shorter, do it. If you can make it longer but you don’t need to, don’t do it.

(2) If someone asks you to “flesh out” your story, take a careful look at it to make sure you’ve rendered every scene in a way that readers can see what’s happening, that you have created a protagonist who is sufficiently three-dimensional, and that the story is emotionally engaging enough to keep up reader interest. If it seems to you that “fleshing out the story” just means “increasing the word count to a predetermined number,” then push back against making the changes.

(3) Don’t add a subplot just to create a longer story. Only add a subplot if it provides necessary dimensionality to the protagonist. Every “subplot” is really another facet of the main plot and if you can drop or add a subplot without altering that, then drop it.

Is it possible to over-edit? Or, is there a point where the story is unsalvageable?

Editing is like sharpening a knife. You hone the story like you would a blade, but if you overdo it you’re no longer sharpening the blade but actually weakening it.
When you’re editing, there’s eventually a matter of diminishing returns regarding the time you put into a draft and the quality of the final story. At a certain point, the time that it would take you to read the entire book isn’t worth the handful of changes that you might be making.
For me, as an artist (read—annoying, neurotic, perfectionist), that’s a hard line to draw, and admittedly, I tend to keep going over my work again and again until I’m convinced that it’s the very best I have to offer.
In my view most people don’t need to worry at all about over-editing. They don’t spend nearly enough time on the editing in the first place.

There’s no point at which a story is unsalvageable, but most people aren’t willing to take the time to make the major, or in some cases seismic, changes that would be necessary to tell that story well. It might take less time to start over or write a different story entirely.

Telling a great story always requires five things: the inevitable movement of the story from the origination to the resolution (that is, every event is caused by the one that precedes it), believability, escalation, motivation, and surprise. Apart from grammatical errors and copyediting, these areas are the biggest problems most stories face. So, it’s vital that as you work on your story, you continue to ask:

(1) Inevitability: Are there gaps in narrative logic? Do things happen for no reason—other than that I think they need to in order to make my outline work?
(2) Believability: Is everything that happens believable even if it’s impossible? Does the character act in a way that’s consistent with his or her core attitudes, desires, inner turmoil, and outer circumstances?
(3) Escalation: Are the stakes being raised? Is the danger becoming more imminent or more unstoppable?
(4) Motivation: What drives this character to act? In other words, what does the character want more than anything else?  How far is he or she willing to go to get it? Is every action that the character takes sufficiently motivated by the story events?
(5) Surprise: Do the scenes, the acts, and the story as a whole end in a way that people won’t see coming, but that also follow inevitably from what precedes it?

If you continually ask yourself these questions as you’re working on your story, you’ll find less need to have to start over or to get to the point at which it’s not worth your time to rework the story to salvage it.

Do you use any writing software, and does that make it easier/harder to edit and move things around?

I recommend a program called Scrivener to collect all my ideas and then combine and develop my first draft of the book. After trying a number of other software programs, I’ve found Scrivener to be far superior to them and at a fraction of the price. Check out their site to see the capabilities and uniqueness of the program.
However, as I near the end of the draft, I will often transfer the document to Pages to do the final formatting.
Incidentally, as I work through the various drafts of the book, I print it out in different formats (with different fonts and font sizes) to edit it. I find that this helps me notice things that I tend to overlook when I keep printing out the book with the same format, font, etc.
For me, I find it most helpful to print out the book in single space to edit it early in the process when I’m focusing more on the story’s flow, then 1.5 or double space to do more word-by-word copyediting, and then in single space again at the end of the process to look at the book more through the eyes of how a reader would see it.
Get the tools, nail down the process that works for you, and then go for it. Remember, software is simply one tool at your disposal. Story matters more than anything else, so whatever helps you improve your story is the program you need to use, even if other people think it’s clunky.

Do you have test readers give you suggestions, or is your work 100% Steven James original with you as the only reader that needs satisfying?

Before I send in my manuscripts I will typically have four or five readers look it over and give me some feedback. With my crime novels I try to get (1) an FBI agent or a police officer, (2) a medical doctor, (3) a person familiar with the series, (4) a freelance editor, and (5) someone from my target audience who isn’t familiar with the series.

I will give them specific directions on what I’d like them to look for, then I take those into account as I work on the story. I usually send out the manuscripts to them before the end is fully pulled together, that way there’s still time for me to make changes.

The only other time I give something to readers is early on in the process when I need encouragement to keep going. At that point I know pretty much what the scene needs to accomplish, but I’m not fully committed to that specific wording and so on. Since I know I’ll still be going through that scene another dozen times or so, I just want to see if the scene is vivid, if the reader can see what’s happening.

Do you prefer to edit your work one chapter/section at a time, or do you prefer to write a completed rough draft before beginning to edit?

Story events are always causally related—this means that everything that happens is caused by the thing that precedes it. Therefore, each scene is inextricably tied to what precedes it and what follows it.

So here’s the paradox: you don’t know where a story needs to be (currently) until you know where it goes, and you don’t know where it needs to go unless you know where it’s been. How does that work out in the actual writing process? I’m not even sure exactly, except that I need to continually weave the story backward and forward, rewriting what I’ve done and figuring out where to go word by word as I develop the story and figure out where it is leading.

Back to the question. I tend to work on a scene until I can see it, then I reread the story before that scene to get the context and pace as I move forward. (However, there are some transitional scenes that I don’t shape too much until I know what happens next—so that I’ll know what needs to have happened to cause that to happen. Make sense?) As details emerge and the story grows I will constantly go back to rewrite the scenes that lead up to the one I’m working on.

My books are typically so complex that as I work on each progressive scene I need to go back and recast what happens—this is especially true in crime novels in which every clue drives the story forward and if you change clue progression you will change the story’s direction.

Finally, when you write, you’re inevitably making promises to the reader about what will need to happen (the would-be lovers need to get together or be torn apart, the detective must face the killer, the hero must find the dragon, etc.). So as I’m writing, I will often think of those scenes in which I keep those promises and sketch them out even though they might not happen for several hundred pages.

How much and for how long do you self-edit? When do you share it with editors? How do you know it's done?

Somehow you slipped three questions in under the guise of asking one. Very sneaky of you. Let’s give it a shot.

First of all, I self-edit a lot.

Sometimes people ask me how many drafts or revisions I go through and for a while I told them, “Maybe a hundred or so.” They would scoff and I would feel a little weird—like I was probably using too much hyperbole just to get my point across.

At last I decided I wanted to be able to answer the question honestly, so while I was working on my forthcoming novel Placebo, I kept track of how many times I read through the prologue and changed something in it—even if it was only one word. I stopped counting when I hit fifty revisions. So, with no exaggeration, I can tell you that by the time I’m finished with a novel I’ve gone through and edited the entire thing dozens of times.

As far as feedback, I’ll ask for it only at certain times during the development of a story. Early on, I might have someone read it and I’ll say, “Be gentle. I know it’s not done, just tell me the stuff you like.” Then after the story begins to take shape, I may have plot questions or specific areas that I know are weak and I’ll ask readers or an editor for suggestions to work through that part of the narrative.

If you ask for critique too early on you can smother the idea before it’s had a chance to really breathe, and if you ask too late it won’t do any good because the story will be full-grown by then and it’s not going to change much anyway.

Finally, I know a story is done when I can’t improve it anymore. It’s as simple as that. If I find things in it that I can fix, tweak, hone, etc, then I know it’s not done yet. When I read through the entire book and I can’t find a single word or punctuation mark that I think could or should be changed, then the book is finished.