The Marquis de Leech

Silly question - are you only Campbell-eligible for your first professional work, or can any professional work published in the two year window after your debut count? (Say in your case you churn out another novel next year - could you be nominated for that, or just Sailor to a Siren?).

I see what the problem is. The board thinks trying to capitalise U is underline, and capitalise S is strike. A shame I can't undo it without deleting the entire post, but I hope you get the idea.

Cut bold.

My analogy would be Charles Dickens as written by Jim Theis.

Grrr.... the board has decided to strike out half my above post, and won't let me unstrike it.

In the unlikely event that Rychard finally chooses to listen, here's another edit job. To be honest, I'm seeing it more as an intellectual challenge at this point - trying to make this stuff into readable prose. I do think it's interesting that Rychard cites King as an influence. He's clearly never read King's On Writing, where King says "the road to hell is paved with adverbs" (personally, I'm not dogmatic about it - adverbs are a perfectly legitimate part of prose - but the general principle is valid).

The entire second line has to go, since it violates Point Of View.

Yes. Wise Phuul is coming out in November (published by Inspired Quill, a small press in the UK). Apparently I'll get the first look at the cover art sometime this month.

I know I shouldn't, but editing: Then, he staggered about drunkenly, trampling over the sparse grass, his bare feet randomly sinking into the still-wet raith. Far overhead, the full lunus continued to hang tenaciously in the sky, its lacht mix[ed]ing with that from a plethora of blazingly bright siriettes, each of which was fixed in a constellation; the entire nacht was a black canvas upon which was painted any number of ethereal images. Gramrus shadowed his footsteps for a few casual teythes, then stopped in the doorway, his rock-like face set hard and his dark red eyes narrowed. (Again, cut bold). "Far overhead, the full lunus continued to hang tenaciously in the sky" sounds like something from The Eye of Argon.

To put it another way, good prose should not call attention to itself. Good prose should not be a set of neon lights, and should not distract from the actual story.

Rychard, believe me, I know a thing or two about editing. You really have two choices. The first is to keep putting your fingers in your ears. The second is that you take criticism on board, and become a better writer. If you want to go for the first option, that's fine - no-one can force you to change. It's just that if you don't improve your prose - which means cutting unnecessary stuff, being more careful with adjectives and adverbs, and being more precise - no-one will read your work. You do want people to read your work, don't you?

No, I'm suggesting you cut the fat from your sentences so that the reader is not encumbered with unnecessary verbiage. "Omit needless words" is up there with "show, don't tell" as a cardinal rule of writing. Let me take that paragraph again: At about that tyme, yet over on Wallins Street, somewhat to the north and west of the tailor’s shoppe, Lanuche gingerly walked back down the rotting steps of Thomryd’s cellar and then tottered over to its eastern end with the hideous, makeshift dress hanging loosely over her well-rounded frame. As she went, she lay her right hand lightly on the craggy, hewn stone wall to support her way; and because she was so very petite, the steps didn’t even so much as groan as she made her way carefully down them, almost as a felis would. We have no point of comparison, so "about that tyme" is meaningless. "Somewhat" is simply a weasel word. Don't hedge your bets - be precise. A tailor's is by definition a tailor's shop, so you don't need "shoppe". Gingerly implies caution - which doesn't fit with the tottering (which makes her sound clumsy and incautious). This is from Lanuche's point of view, and she wouldn't call her own dress hideous. Besides, what is hideous about it? Well-rounded is an unnecessary adjective (and telling not showing). "As she went" adds nothing to the sentence - it's implied by the rest. We don't need to know it was her right-hand - it distracts the reader. "Lightly" is an unnecessary adverb. "Craggy, hewn stone wall" is an adjectival pile-up. Adjectives aren't evil, but you shouldn't overuse them - they are often the sign of a dull noun. A craggy wall implies stone. "So very petite" - telling not showing. The fact that the rotten wood isn't groaning implies she's light. You have her reaching the bottom of the steps, and then tottering off - and now she's apparently back on the stairs. The scene feels confused.

Rychard: No offence, mate, but one of the most important traits in an author is learning to accept criticism. Believe me, we all write terrible stuff, and people call us up on it - so we go back and improve. We don't improve by putting our fingers in our ears, and going "lalalala." There *is* constructive criticism here. Specifically, you need to improve your prose. No problem there - go through and cut unnecessary words. Let's take the first paragraph: At about that tyme, yet over on Wallins Street, somewhat to the north and west of the tailor’s shoppe, Lanuche gingerly walked back down the rotting steps of Thomryd’s cellar and then tottered over to its eastern end with the hideous, makeshift dress hanging loosely over her well-rounded frame. As she went, she lay her right hand lightly on the craggy, hewn stone wall to support her way; and because she was so very petite, the steps didn’t even so much as groan as she made her way carefully down them, almost as a felis would. Cut all the bold, and you have a much tighter, more readable result.

Can we take actual discussions of writing to the Boarders Writing A Novel thread?

Oooh excellent. I don't own a kindle, so I've been looking forward to your paperback version.

Ramsay is a psychotic, evil, sociopath, who revels in being the Patrick Bateman of Westeros. But he never pretends to be anything else. He isn't trying to push evil as being for some sort of greater good. He also only targets prisoners (under which heading we can include Sansa) and those at the bottom of the feudal food-chain, which means to some extent, you know where you stand with him. He isn't going to wake up one morning and start torturing his Captain of the Guards or something. TV!Stannis is trying to push a horrendously evil act as a righteous one - because a God who sends forth demons told him to. People who could follow the Boltons (if only on a better you than me principle) couldn't follow Stannis without knowing that they might be next. With Gods and Demons, all bets are off, and if Stannis is prepared to do this to his own daughter, what will he do to you? Literally, it's got to the point where the only reason anyone would want to support TV!Stannis is because they can't yet escape him. Ramsay it is. Put it this way. I've been on this forum for nigh on a decade, and was a fan long before there was even talk of an adaption. Nothing I have ever encountered, either in the books, or in the TV show so far, has done so much to shatter my faith in where this story is heading.

I'm another one who is now officially cheering for Ramsay against TV!Stannis. Leaving aside questions of character assassination, and the sheer lack of logic involved, how the hell does TV!Stannis expect anyone to fight for him after that? Were I in Stannis' army, I'd grab some horse meat and do a runner for Castle Black (taking the black if necessary).

King's Evidence, presumably.

Eh? I don't recall 1996 as having significantly different sensibilities from 2015. As for the episode - I'm honestly waiting till the end of the season, in the hope that I'll be able to see it in context. I try to be fair-minded about these things.

The Maggy the Frog scene should have been cut altogether, but at least it did us a favour by cutting the valonquar nonsense. Now Cersei retains her organic reasons for disliking Tyrion. My impression of this season, based off one episode? The producers have realised the fourth and fifth books are rubbish, so are going their own way. Good on them.

Pushing Jon as LC at this point is a significant improvement on the book. Book!Jon sits in his cell and mopes (not even bothering to vote), while others engineer his rise to power. TV!Jon actually has motivations and goals. However, what we have now at the Wall is: - Raiders to the South, who are coming North. - Mance's army proper, which is coming South. - The mutineers at Crasters (with Bran, et al). Jon needs to be the one to deal with the Southern threat. Thus he cannot go North to Crasters. On the other hand, if Thorne and Slynt are around to see the Southern attack, they can't very well run with the Jon's a Wilding stitch-up. I think we're looking at more divergences down the road...

OK, just finished watching the episode. As a book reader, this was the first time I've ever scratched my head, thinking WTF?! The Land of Always Winter... leaving aside that the Others look wrong (too skeletal, and not elf-like enough for my tastes), I wonder if there's sort of a magical cloning going on with the baby, followed by speed growth. A Wight Baby is no use to anyone, and an Other Baby is no use unless it reaches full size in a hurry. Or perhaps the Others are sacrificing the baby again to some Higher Entity of their own? The latter is less likely, since it'd be too convoluted (the Others become mere proxies), and I think the blue eyed ending indicates that the baby has become one of Them. The Other fortress had battlements... so the Others do archery as well as sword-fighting. Also, Bran's balls have dropped.

Clearly Selyse is screwing Patchface. Lannister Propaganda FTW!

Interesting that Robb isn't going to the Freys because he wants to head back North. He's going to the Freys because he needs more men. Possibly they're downplaying the importance of the Twins as being the key to the Neck, or perhaps they're playing up Robb as a doofus who doesn't know when to cut his losses.