Snark Crapometer readers try to help

Along with  Miss Snark's comments on the hooks submitted by writers, including mine (see previous post), her readers offered up comments. They're extra sets of fresh eyes, so they can be helpful. And then, perhaps not. Here are the comments posted for my hook, and my thoughts. I'll try not to be too defensive.

#1 Way off the mark, but when I read "Ailia" and "Clan" what popped into my head was Jean Auel. "Ailia" aounded the same in my head as "Ayla". Doubt you wanted that connection, but then I might be the only one.

I'm guessing you're the only one. What an incredibly subjective business this is. In one of my workshops one attendee thought a particular sentence was especially dumb because of the meaning she gave to one of the nouns (an animal, I think). It didn't mean that to me, and I asked the rest of the group. Turned out she was the only one of about 30 people who interpreted it in her way, and that was due to a very personal association. I would think a pro such as an agent would steam on past random associations such as this.

#2 I'm left with quite a few issues.

* You complain about HP as "anything-is-possible" sorcery, yet your magic doesn't seem particularly constrained, going so far as to have the ability to make a genocidal plague. Nor does it seem unique enough to warrant two intro paragraphs as though this were a unique situation.

I didn't "complain" about Harry Potter as "anything-is-possible" sorcery, I just referred to it as a quick example of the usual fantasy approach to "magic." As for "as though this were a unique situation," my approach is unique in my mind and, in fact, could well be quite unique for most other people. How can you judge from a mere statement of a premise? This isn't a helpful comment.

* The use of the words "clans" and "kin" make this sound like a historical or fantasy novel. But "Homeland Security" seems like present.

So? In modern times there are still clans and kin (how about Scotland?). And, yeah, Homeland Security should seem like the present. And there is tension created by the contrast, is there not? This input isn't helpful as these things are integral to the story and can't be arbitrarily changed.

* Gabriel has been "isolated" since childhood, but has a son?

Okay, he has felt isolated. Who'd have thought someone would think that the man has been physically isolated his entire life, as if in solitary confinement? Seems like a very picky, literalistic reading to me. But I have added the word "felt" to my hook so some other er, reader won't be led astray by such a nonsensical interpretation.

* What is up with that homeland security guy? That's out of the blue with no explanation. It also doesn't follow what preceeded it. One second she's trying to kill herself, and a minute later she's trying to escape.

Perhaps this commenter has never heard of "inciting incident." In fiction, something happens to throw a person out of their current situation, to block their desires, and to cause conflict. It can be -- should be -- unanticipated by the protagonist. That's what the Homeland Security element is in this story. For the character, it does strike "out of the blue" (do you often use clichés?), as it should, although it is entirely motivated in the novel. However, said motivation couldn't be squeezed into a 250-word hook. Not a helpful comment.

* It's not until most of the way through the hook that we find out that Gabe doesn't even know that he has magic. For all we could tell, since they were introed in the same para, they both had the same background.

Perhaps this commenter needs to practice his/her reading skills -- the hook clearly states that he learns about sharing the lineage that leads to these abilities, not that he has the ability. Seems to me this makes clear that they don't have the same background. Also, it's clear that he knows he has something -- he can "see" lies. I'm hoping that agents, for whom queries are their life's blood, read a little more carefully/accurately.

#3 Your use of language is odd; we seem to be in the modern day, but you're saying 'kin' rather than 'family', and using archaic words like 'clan'. What up?

"What up?" is that there is, as the hook says, a group of people who are kindred that live in secret. Also, "kin" has a far broader meaning than "family," which suggests a smaller, closer unit. In my dictionary, the first meaning for kin is "a group of persons of common ancestry." Yes, it can also mean family, but not necessarily. And since when is the word "clan" archaic (see Scotland)? You had to look it up? What's up is that it's supposed to raise a story question, which it did in your mind. It wasn't supposed to provide the answer as well.

Also, watch your metaphors: pit bulls don't charge, that's actual bulls.

Actually, actual dogs, people, horses, lions, buffalos, all kinds of beasts can and do charge. The act is not somehow limited to bulls. But thanks for mentioning it.

Why would people be persecuted? How? Let's hear some specifics.

More plot details in a brief hook? With no word limit, I have included why they fear persecution, but it seems to me that it's not a huge leap to understand that elements in a society would persecute people who were different and had such unusual abilities. History is rife with examples.

From the description, you make Ailia (how do you pronounce that?) being a 'woman who loves too much' sound like a virtue. That rings the Mary Sue bell in my ears. She does have some genuine, non-virtuous, non-sympathy-winning, unromantic faults, right? If not, she needs some.

It's a subjective interpretation for you to take that as a virtue. It wasn't intended that way and, to my eyes, something in excess does not automatically equate with virtue. Actually, "too much" seems like an automatic negative to me. As for faults, how does a 250-word hook explore character in any meaningful depth?

The other problem with your description is that it's pretty normal to be shattered by the death of your husband, but the way you put it makes it sound like a personality trait. A tendency to retreat from life would be a personality trait; inablility to face her fears, unintentional self-centredness leading her to put her own distress above the urgent needs of others; those could account for her behaviour while also making sure she's not over-idealised. But honestly, it would only be an exceptional character trait if she *wasn't* distraught over her bereavement.

It's your interpretation that this could be a personality trait. I don't see how "Crushed by grief when her beloved husband is killed, she aims to end her life" makes this a personality trait. It's a reaction, not a trait, and is very normal. She's a human being. Why would you think that the intent was to make this an "exceptional character trait?" It's just her state of mind when the novel opens, and motivates the behavior at that point. As an editor, I deal with "overwriting" a lot. This seems to me to be a case of "overreading."

I'd avoid odious comparisons with Harry Potter. For one thing, it's a children's book and this sounds like an adult one; different market, and you'll sound like your tastes are immature if you don't seem to grasp the distinction. For another, hey, Harry Potter sells. And for still another, magic is always fictional in novels. Rowling does it one way, you do it another, but I don't see anything more realistic about your treatment of it than hers. It's all make-believe whoever does it.

"Odious?" The comparison, to my mind, is factual, not hateful. And, as mentioned earlier, the intent is to separate what I mean by "magic" from what is generally perceived. To my mind, there is no semantic loading, just a simple "unlike this…" comparison. I not only grasp the distinction, I point it out. And it's not "all make-believe whoever does it." You say "magic is always fictional in novels." Really? How about magical realism? Also, I specifically state "what we think of as 'magic'" in order to differentiate what I'm talking about from genre expectations. To become briefly snarky, pay attention.

Moreover, speculative fiction, which this is, often imagines things that are later discovered to be part of the real world. However, few in today's world would expect all the wonderful imaginings of Rowling to become fact. My story, however, postulates an undiscovered energy and the control of it that could, just possibly, be real. I don't think I'm the one who fails to grasp the distinction, as it is made perfectly clear by the use of the word "not."

I don't think anything can 'drive' someone into autism. Last I heard, you just get born that way. Falsely diagnosed as autistic because his behaviour is odd, conceivably. Driven into autism - not really. Especially as autism means no empathy, which doesn't lend itself to healing skills.

True. This was a function of the word limit. The boy is driven to behavior that's interpreted as autism. It would have put me over the limit to add the word "what seems to be," which I have done in the revised, expanded hook.

You sound like you're very invested in the story, which is good, but you need to put more into presenting it to get readers equally involved. I'd like to hear more about the relationships between the characters aside from their magical skills, because it's the characters that are going to drive the plot.

Well, give me more space and I’ll put more into presenting it. The relationships in this novel are far to complex to get into in a brief hook. I didn’t even mention the death of the character’s own son because it doesn’t belong in a hook even though it has a big place in the story. I liked this commenter's tone--helpful, respectful. This is the way criticism ought to be delivered.

 #4  I'm still trying to sort out how a "natural energy" that allows one to heal, fly, or kill, is any different from the "anything-is-possible sorcery" of Harry Potter. After all, even in HP one had to be born with the power, and then has to study hard in order to learn how to use it.

You don’t see how “natural” is different from what is clearly “supernatural” in Harry Potter? “Natural” means constrained by the laws of physics, which is a limitation that does not apply in the world of Harry Potter. This is a case of not paying attention to the actual meaning of the few words that this hook allows. I believe it should be clear, just from the normal definitions of the words used, that “natural” is different from “anything-is-possible sorcery.” Everything is not possible in the nature that we know.

 #5 I suggest you lose the first two paragraphs, I don't think they're helping you convey your work effectively. You need to find a way to describe your setting, because words like "healer," "kin," "clans, imply one kind of setting, but Homeland Security pulls us into the here and now.

The first part of this comment is constructive criticism, and is appreciated. However, for me, the premise of the novel is interesting, and it seemed logical that it might be effective for an agent, especially one who works with fantasy, so that’s why the paragraphs are there. In fact, shortly after this hook was posted, I received two requests from agents, one a partial and the other a full, based on this hook. So it’s not necessarily a bad thing to do or a waste of words.

Also, in today’s world, there are still healers, clans, and kin—in America, they exist today in the backwoods of the Ozarks. There’s no logic to saying that they necessarily refer to a specific setting--if I’d told you that the novel took place in Scotland, I doubt this would have come up. In fact, the heritage of the people in my story is Celtic, and that has to do with how they think of themselves in modern times. I’m fairly sure that there are modern Scots who are aware of what their clan is and who their kin are. In addition, to my thinking, the contrast of those terms, which are admittedly not common in modern America, created a little bit of a story question, i.e. how do they mix with “Homeland Security?”

 #6 "Ailia" sounds like "ailing", as in sick, feeble, which made me see her as a weak character (especially as she starts out wanting to end her own life). Frankly, she sounds a bit depressing, and so the story sounds a bit like that too.

I would hope that a purely subjective reaction like this would be put aside by a pro like Miss Snark. While it’s fair to have a negative reaction to a name, to condemn a character and a story on the basis of a very personal reaction seems unprofessional to me. For me, the name is pretty, and romantic. Does that make either of us right? I don’t think so. What if this reader didn’t like “Gabe” as well? This kind of interpretation could drive a writer nuts if he/she tried to respond to all possible personal reactions to names. Everybody doesn’t like one name or another. If I were to try to avoid turning off anyone by the names used, then the hook would have to use generic terms such as Protagonist One and Protagonist Two.

Interestingly, the use of “kin” and “clan,” especially in conjunction with “Homeland Security,” popped up 3 times. Things that pop up frequently deserve consideration. In this case, though, I think these are symptomatic of a knee-jerk genre expectation to the extent that there was no room in these readers’ minds for a different approach. Perhaps some agents are similarly hide-bound, and thus I won’t succeed with them, either. At the same time, I don’t want to hook up with an agent who isn’t open-minded, flexible, and aware of nuance. The reason is that my stuff doesn’t meet genre expectations, the ones these commenters thought were missing. Fair enough.

Next week, I’ll post a rewritten description/hook. It’s longer than the 250-word limit Miss Snark imposed, and I’ll try to trim it one of these days. But if it’s all interesting, then it may work. In fact, it has recently gone out in another flight of queries.

For what it’s worth,

Ray

Free edit. Email a sample for an edit that I can post here.

ARCHIVES .

© 2007 Ray Rhamey

Comments

[Twill00]

Hmmm. Well, any opinion you get from a reviewer will be merely that person's experience and opinion. I am one of the people who felt a big - Kathunk - when you suddenly put Homeland Security into what up to then appeared to be a clan-oriented historical contexted novel set in an unknown century.

When you talk about "knee-jerk genre expectation", perhaps you should consider that it is the particular word choices that you have cobbled together that have set (or failed to set) the expectation. In retrospect, I can tell that the "we" in "What happens if we discover them living in secret among us?" refers to modern year 2000+ Americans. However, at the time, with no further context, I assumed it was a more general "we humans".

Whether you can take your mental image of modern day and paint it in with a more specific word or two, is up to you. I'm just reporting the WTF moment for the purposes of letting you improve your query.

Best Wishes, Twill

[Celia]

First, I don't get the concept of critiquing your critiques at all, it seems like a complete waste of time. But since you went ahead and did it, I'd like to address some of the issues that people brought up, and some of the excuses you made.

1) Waste of space in the opening. You got several comments, and this is an additional one, about your description of the kind of magic your people do and all that jazz. I don't care how their magic works, what its limitations are, etc. Take a moment and ask yourself honestly, who cares? Is the magic the protagonist of the story? Will the magic be facing trials and overcoming obstacles? If not, you're wasting time and words with that. You should open with your main character, and what her problem is.

2) Random Homeland Security moment. I love how you played this off over and over again, but seriously, does this plot point come out of left field as quickly in the book as it does here? Is Homeland Security investigating her already and searching for her family before she is discovered? Does she know about this? That would be an important point to make in your hook, so it doesn't seem like something "just happened" to your main character. And you're wrong, nothing ever "just happens" to the main character in a good book. Even in a disaster story or a survival story there's always someone who predicted the disaster or some hint of how the plane is going down over the Andes or whatever. That way the reader knows that you wrote a "story", and not "random things happening to people I don't care about."

3) How many people need to mention the awkwardness of the main character's name before you accept the fact that it trips up in their brains and makes them hurt and not want to read the rest of your hook. It's like a hot poker to the reader's third eye. Was it your grandmother's name or something that you don't want to let it go? Change it to Aila or Alia, or, go ahead and screw the reader a little harder and call her Aiaiaiaia, which would at least make the book funny.

When a group of people react this way to something you wrote the correct response is to fix it, not bitch in your blog about how wrong everyone is about your hook. Even if it's just ten people it's still a sample of potential readers, and if three of ten say the same thing, it's time to get to work on that.

Moreover, you're not short on word space in this hook to make your story sound good, it can actually be done in less than 250 words:

"When homeland security discovers her ancient clan and begins to suspect that their ability to wield the power of lledri may be a threat to national security, Ailia, the clan's healer, must leave their hidden village and face the threat before her kin are destroyed.
For Ailia, there was no greater calling in life than to be a healer for her clan, and to start a family with her young husband. After a tragic accident claims her husband's life, she is not sure that she can go on. Her grief has blinded her to the threats facing her people, and caused great anger among the clan as she begins to neglect her duties as healer. As Ailia prepares to ritually end her life, she is nearly captured in a raid by Homeland security.
Her clan has been discovered, and her people need her powerful magic skills, but Ailia can't do it alone. Her unfamiliarity with the world outside her clan has left her confused and lost. Then she meets Gabe River, an older man with the ability to see lies in people's minds.
With Gabe's help Ailia must once again hide the rest of her clan from the outside world to ensure their safety, and try to find the peaceful life she has left behind.
FINDING MAGIC is an X-number-of-words fantasy novel."

It's not perfect, but it'll get agents looking. The important thing to remember is to keep it really short. Agents are looking for a reason to reject you, just give them the good parts and leave out most of the details. They get what magic is and what healers are and all that, so go ahead and let them learn how you define these things from your pages when they request them.

[Fuzzy]

As yet another reader, I agree 100% with what Celia said above. In particular, I agree with the pont (raised by several of the Miss Snark commenters as well) that magic is magic, period. You can argue about what you feel is the evident distinction between "natural" and "supernatural" magic all you want, but the fact that you have to keep making this argument demonstrates that your hook has failed to connect with a large percentage of your readers. Perhaps the distinction is clear in the novel, but it is NOT clear in the hook, and should be omitted.

In that regard, Celia's hook is excellent. If I were ever to write a book, I'm hiring her as my editor (or at least my hook writer).

[Eika]

My advice? Listen to these comments. Agents read 100 querries a week. Think they'll bother when something doesn't quite sound right? No.

Personally, I agree with the comments about the name of your main character- when I figured out how I should pronounce it, I thought she'd be weak, and your query makes it seems like she's going to kill herself but stops because Homeland Security wants her dead.

Right now, here's what you need to think of: They're going to read it once. If it's messy, badly worded, or doesn't catch their interest, they're NOT going to sweat the details and do any research. They'll reject it. If it's one freak comment, fine, but any agreements and change is for the better.

[tomdg]

Apologies, I should have read the rest of your posts before commenting on an earlier one.

Some more (probably unwanted) comments.

(1) The setting. If this is set in the real world, I think that should be more clear, as for me that's a real positive thing. If these people are living in our cities, or living in a hidden village community in Tenessee or something, then say so - that's interesting.

(2) "Clan" and "kin" are archaic, even in Scotland. Yes, there are still clans, but life no longer revolves around them. Mentioning these words before anything contemporary gives the impression of a historical or fantastical setting. There seems to be a consensus on this. Does it matter? I think so, because it obscures the contemporary setting (see (1))

(3) Natural vs Supernatural. Is there a distinction? Nature is what is, so everything is part of nature. Science is based on observation. Magic in Harry Potter exists, so it is part of nature. Scientists who observed magic would have to investigate how it worked until it became part of science (physics or otherwise). I'm guessing you may go into more depth about what that "new science" looks like; but like several of the other comments I don't think the distinction you try to draw is clear-cut, helpful, or even valid.

Sorry :( That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the book, just that maybe you could explain it and sell it better.

[Bernita]

While I also think your query hook was too diffuse, I find nothing quaint nor archaic about the use of "clan" or "kin."
Perhaps though, you efforts to contrast "natural" and "supernatural" are a distinction without difference - and unnecessary.