I love indie (also known as self-published) writers. I really do. My Kindle (which I also love) is chock-full of outstanding indie fiction, indie memoir, and indie writing advice. I am in several indie writing communities.

But, I have to tell you that every time someone raises – usually under a flag of neutrality, but sometimes with his freak flag flying and daring you to tell him that some rule actually matters – *takes a breath* Where was I? Oh, yes. Sorry. Whenever someone raises the subject of rules and do we really have to follow them, I just want to reach right through the internet and knock some sense into people.

I could end this now. YES, rules matter. They are there for a reason. DO NOT break them until you are quite sure you completely understand them. Grammar rules. Punctuation rules. Sentence structure rules. Point of View rules. Plotting rules. Sure, most of these can be bent and some can be broken if you’ve got good enough a reason. But if you go breaking them without knowing right down to your bones what you’re doing, you will write a mess.

Point of View is one of those tricky little beasts. I’m not going to write a whole book about point of view. There are are excellent books on that subject. Here are two just off the top of my head:

The Power of Point of View by Alicia Rasley

Write Great Fiction – Characters, Emotion & Viewpoint by Nancy Kress

You can find others.

Let me just say now that skipping around merrily from one character to another giving the reader the thoughts of each of them all in the same scene on the same page will eventually wear out our patience. And, no, just because Johnny is kissing Sally at the same time Sally is kissing Johnny we still don’t need to be inside both their minds at the same time.

One last thing. NO! George R.R. Martin is not breaking the rules of POV characters when he uses ONE, count ‘em ONE, POV voice for each separate chapter of his epic Song of Fire and Ice books. Because, ladies and gentlemen, that is the rule: One POV per chapter. It’s been further sliced to one POV per scene but classically and traditionally One POV Per Chapter is totally correct.

Why in the name of all that’s writerly would someone use Martin as an example of someone who is breaking the rules?

My own preference – not always adhered to – is to write in first person. Yes, it’s limiting. I like that. I like showing the reader only what the narrator sees and hears and knows. Because, guess what, the narrator can be wrong. She can trust the wrong person. She can misinterpret what she sees. And she takes the reader right along with her. Then I write third-person chapters (NOT just paragraphs and not usually scenes, usually whole chapters) that take place away from the first-person narrator, showing events of which she has no knowledge.  After all, Joan Hess and Elisabeth Peters use this technique all the time. Not that I’m in their league, you understand. It’s just an effective technique.

I’ve said it before and will no doubt say it again.

Indie writers have got to be BETTER than traditionally published writers. We have to write cleaner, fresher, prose; we have to make fewer typographical errors; we have to create stronger plots and more lifelike characters. We have to be twice as good to be thought half as good.

As long as we settle for almost as good – heck, as long as we settle for the faint praise of “just as good” – we are doomed to live on the edges, kicked to the curb, and ignored.

Tags: grammar, Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, Point of View, punctuation, writers, writing

I don’t usually post personal things here. I’ve been tagged and asked to tell ten random things about myself. So just this once . . . and I warn you, none of these things is particularly interesting.

1. I have two actual sons and one unofficially adopted son. 2/3 of those young men are currently served in the US military, one in the Army and one in the Air Force.

2. I’ve been writing stories in my head since I was old enough to put words together. I’ve been putting them on paper since I was old enough to hold a pencil. Except for a 15-year (more or less) period when I was too busy trying to make a living, get married, start a family, that sort of thing. And even then I was spinning tales in my head. I can’t help it.

3. I’ve been fascinated by dinosaurs since I was eight or nine years old and first read a couple of books by Roy Chapman Andrews. He was one of the first paleontologists into the Gobi Desert and the first to discover intact dinosaur eggs.

4. At one time or another I’ve had almost every hair colour known to nature. I’ve never done pink or purple (well, not intentionally anyway), but I’ve done blonde (from dark to golden to platinum), brunette ( from almost black to golden brown), red (from dark auburn to flaming copper). Now, owing to damage to my shoulders that limits my ability to hold my hands up in a controlled manner, I’ve had to go grey. Not thrilled.

5. My fantasy men are all Bad Boys: Spike, Damon Salvatore, Eric Northman, Mal Reynolds, Dean Winchester, Angelus (not Angel). But my real life man is a straight-arrow, good man. I’ve been married to him since 1976. I suppose it’s going to last.

6. I’m a rabid Washington Redskins fan. Even when they couldn’t beat the junior varsity team of Lower Badlandia State University.

7. I’m presently obsessed with Sweden and all things Swedish. Except for the food. I just can’t go there.

8. I probably read at least four or five books a week. Week in and week out. Thank goodness for my Kindle. Now I buy only about half as many physical books as I used to.

9. I’ve only recently taken up zombies. For years I couldn’t stand them. In the last couple of years, I’ve written a couple of zombie stories, I’ve watched a lot of zombie films, I’ve become happily addicted to “The Walking Dead,” and I have read a lot of zombie books.

10. I have been trying to write this for two hours. I HATE writing about myself. This is filler. I know. But it is just beyond me to think of a tenth thing. THE END. (whew)

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello

Your English is 86 percent Shakespearean.

Is this the Bard I see before me?

Above you see the verdict. I pulled a random couple of paragraphs from my current work in progress, “Rule Number One,” not, you might think. a work of much literary merit, and plunked the passage into this nifty little analyzer from the Oxford Dictionary. And . . . huh. Apparently I owe much of my language to the Bard of Avon, even when I am not trying for the highbrow.  I suspect if I plunked in some other bits, the percentage might be higher and other bits might be lower. This was just one random spot.

Wanna try for yourself? Oh, come on. You know you do.

How Shakespearean Are You Anyway?

Tags: just for fun, Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, Shakespeare, writing

I belong to Winston-Salem Writers and this organisation is producing a serial horror novel. A serial novel is one written by a group of writers. Each writer writes a chapter. There have been several fairly well-known serial novels published, in fact.

They asked me if I’d be willing to write a chapter for the W-S Writers Serial Horror Novel. Of course, I agreed. And it went live on the website. Mine is (for the moment) the most recent chapter, chapter six.

If you’re interested in a piece of my fiction writing, you can find it at Winston-Salem Writers Serial Horror Novel – Rady.

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, promotion, writing

Another review! This time it’s not a novel but rather a novella or novelette, "Fugue," by J. Joseph Wright. I should say right off that this novelette was a gift from Mr. Wright to me, no strings attached. I didn’t promise a good review in exchange for the novelette. I didn’t even promise a review at all.

"Fugue" is a very nicely done horror story, building to a disturbing conclusion. Mr. Wright starts the tension early and doesn’t let up. This is a thoroughly satisfying and thoroughly scary story.

As always, I won’t give much synopsis. That policy might be an especially good idea when reviewing a story like this one. Paul Smith has moved into a new apartment. He gradually seems to become obsessed with the couple in the next apartment, particularly the wife. Truly, if I tell you much more, I’ll spoil the story.

There are a few sentences that could benefit from another glance by an editor. There are a couple of places where the wrong word is used. These things happen, in traditionally published, professionally edited works as well as in indie works. I notice them and mention them. Are they enough to dampen my enthusiasm for this story? Not noticeably.

There were also a few places where I thought the writer had made some mistakes in POV (point of view). Later I realised that, no, what I’d thought were mistakes were Mr. Wright being twisty. I do so enjoy being wrong!

If you are in the mood for a very tense, nerve-rattling, lip-gnawing piece of horror fiction, "Fugue" is an excellent choice. I highly recommend it. I also look forward to reading more of Joseph Wright’s books. He has a real gift for story-telling.

Maybe don’t read this novella the first night after you’ve moved into a new apartment. Just sayin’.

This excellent horror read is available at Amazon for Kindle.

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, reviews

A one-word review of this book? Terrific.

You want more than one word? Okay, I’m glad to oblige. This book, the first of the Ciriath Cycle by John M. Dow, is a masterful blend of paranormal, epic historical, supernatural, romance, spiced with a dash of horror. It’s so good I read it in small doses, wanting to prolong the pleasure of the book as long as possible. Mr. Dow is a skillful wielder of metaphor and his imagery is always precise, never ham-handed or overdone. The characters in this book are full-fleshed and well-drawn, three-dimensional and alive on the page (or the e-reader as the case may be).

I don’t like to give much in the way of synopsis because I get annoyed when I read reviews that give away the store.  But I will say a little. In this book, there are two forces at work, the Protectorate and the Opposition, with an uneasy Truce between the two. James, one of the First—an Immortal being who can create and destroy worlds—and his companion of three millennia, who now goes by the name of Emily, must confront James’ unaccountable attraction to a young woman, Dawn. How they finally deal with the seemingly unsolvable problem leads to a stunning conclusion and a stirring lead-in for the second book.

Frankly, I squealed, “No!” out loud at the moment when one character makes a supreme sacrifice for the sake of another. It was perfectly logical and in character. And it broke my heart. I loved it.

American readers, be aware that Mr. Dow is a Scot. If you think a word is misspelled (say, for example, “foetal” as in “foetal position”) think again. That’s not a misspelling, no matter what my own spell-check thinks. It’s perfectly correct for British, Scottish, Canadian, etc. usage. An awful lot of British books are now being “Americanized” for American consumption, and we are not accustomed to seeing British spellings. It’s a pet peeve of mine, as a matter of fact, and a reason we are sometimes so provincial. We also sometimes fuss at British authors for “misspelling” words when they’re just not using American English. C’mon, people, it was their language first.  Share.

And speaking of Americanisms, I have (of course) one little gripe. Mr. Dow places one memorable section of “Careless Talk” in East Texas. He has a waitress, Rose McIvor, say, “Hey, Billy, that’s me done.” These words do not trip lightly from an American tongue. An American would be more likely to say, “I’m outta here,” or the very ungrammatical but equally common, “I’m gone.”

I don’t really have a star system for this blog at this time, but I would highly, highly recommend this book.

It’s available at Amazon (Kindle) and Smashwords and Amazon (paperback)

I should also add that my copy was a gift from John Dow and that it was not given to me with any strings attached. I didn’t even promise to review it at all, much less give it a good review. And in case I have not made myself quite clear, I loved this book and am eagerly awaiting the second book.

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, reviews

I wrote, a month or so ago, a review of an excellent horror novel, “From Within.” The review was published on The View From My Kindle.  It can be found here. I gave the book a good review. I’ve promoted the book on my Twitter, my Facebook, and now here. I have told everybody in Internet-world how much I loved “From Within.”

Someone, however, commented that he thought I spent too much time carping about grammar and punctuation errors. I did mention some errors, true. I also gave the book four-and-a-half of a possible five stars. I praised the book’s many strengths. Should I have ignored the few weaknesses? I think not.

I believe a reviewer should note any grammatical, spelling, misused words, and punctuation errors because a reader will. Most readers will not be too bothered by a few goofs. A book that is full of them, though, will annoy even the most grammar unaware reader eventually. It will annoy some of us rather quickly.

Indie or self-published books must be as polished, as perfect, as well-written, as thoroughly edited as we can possibly make them. Why? Because otherwise they are apt to be swallowed up by what Joe Konrath calls the tsunami of crap. Speaking of Joe, his blog should be a must-read for any indie writer. Find it right here.

Traditional publishers seek any excuse to look down on the indie writer and indie publishing. Why give them a gold-plated reason by putting out a book that’s filled with bad grammar, random tense changes, punctuation errors, etc.?

Tags: blogs, Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, publishing, reviews, writing

I’ve read more and more often about writers who, upon receiving a less-than-stellar review, have what I can only call a baby tantrum.

They either demand that the reviewer retract the review, change the review, reread the book because obviously he couldn’t have read the masterpiece she wrote if he gave it a 2-star rating, or whatever. Sometimes the offended writer will threaten the reviewer with retaliatory bad reviews if the reviewer is also a writer.

Please, people. Grow the heck up. And I’m not talking to the reviewers here. I’m a writer and a reviewer. I know the pain of sending out work and having those precious words smacked down because they didn’t appeal of the readers. I also have an editor who, bless her heart, does not know the meaning of the words “false praise.” When I write stuff that sucks, she tells me in words I have no difficulty in understanding. Do I love her? You bet your bottom dollar I do. Every writer needs an editor like that. (Disclaimer: I provide the same tough love for her when she writes.)

So you got a bad (by your lights) review. What are you supposed to do?

First, look at the context. Are most of the reviews you’ve gotten positive? (If all those positive reviews are from your mother and your Aunt Susie and your boyfriend, get out the saltshaker and discount the stars by at least a quarter. You know those people are going to give you the benefit of the doubt even when there is no doubt to give.) If you’ve gotten mostly positive reviews and then out of the blue someone gives you a bad one, suck it up, grit your teeth, and move on. Lashing out at the reviewer makes you look like a tantrum-throwing baby. This is not a good image for a writer.

Then look at the reviewer’s record. If she’s a tough reviewer who never gives a rave review, that might put your okay-but-not-stellar review into a different light. If she is normally a creampuff who praises everything she reads and she panned your book mercilessly, ignore it. Again, getting into an internet epithet-hurling spat won’t make either of you look like mature adults. And the internet never forgets. Even if you delete everything, someone somewhere will have a screencap. You know they will. Better to just take a deep breath and let it go.

If more than one reviewer makes the same point, make a note. If the review is mostly positive but the reviewer notices some bad word choices or misspellings, make a note. This is one way to improve your writing so the next set of reviews will all be better.

And, really, isn’t better writing always a good thing? Or is that just me?

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, reviewers, writers, writing

So there I was, innocently reading the comments in a blog (which will remain nameless for reasons which will become obvious in a moment) and was totally blindsided and gobsmacked by one would-be writer’s remark. The topic on this professional blog was books about writing fiction.

The would-be writer stated that she had never read a book on writing.

Excuse me? I promise you, I went back and read it twice to be sure I wasn’t imagining things.

I do not usually predict people’s futures. I predict, however, that if this wannabe never reads a book on the craft and art (it’s both) of writing, she will never find much success.

Writing is not like walking or speaking a language, both of which you pretty much learn by imitation and trial and error. You cannot learn to write well just from observing and copying. Would you really want to eat a meal cooked by someone who never studied cooking at all? Or even have your living room painted by someone who never learned the basics of painting?

I doubt it.

Writing is much the same. No one really does it well by operating entirely on instinct. Do I have two or seven or more recommendations for good craft books? Oh, you know I do.

In no particular order:

Page After Page by Heather Sellers

Chapter After Chapter by Heather Sellers

How to Write a Damn Good Novel by James N. Frey

How to Write a Damn Good Novel, II by James N. Frey

Write Great Fiction — Plot and Structure by James Scott Bell

Writing Fiction For All You’re Worth by James Scott Bell (Kindle Edition)

On Writing by Stephen King

Confessions of a Freelance Penmonkey by Chuck Wendig (Kindle Edition)

The Novel Writer’s Toolkit by Bob Mayer

Now, is this a comprehensive list? Of course not. It’s not even a list of all the “how to write” books I have in my library. It’s just a list of the ones I can think of at the moment. Off the top of my head. I’m too lazy to get up and go into the other room and look. So I just thought of these. You cannot go wrong with any of them. Or all of them.

Moral of this story? To write well, you have to learn how. You can’t learn how unless you study.

Tags: Mary Ann Peden-Coviello, writing