Today's #TuesdayTip is another #ConversationsWithTheirCreations.
The premise is simple - an author conducts an interview with one of their characters. I leave it up to them how they wish to interpret that brief.
My guest author today is Jonathan Wilkins. A retired teacher, lapsed Waterstones bookseller and former basketball coach, he now takes notes for students with special needs at Leicester University.
He writes contemporary and historical crime thrillers.
Below, we meet the hero of his Poppy Knows Best series, set mostly in the 1920s, starting in 1917.

Could you introduce yourself?
It’s complicated I’m afraid. My mother always calls me Pandora, her family name. My father calls me Ophelia, which is his family name. My friends call me Poppy.
My full name is Lady Pandora Ophelia Penelope Loveday.
I live in Mountain Ash in Wales in Loveday Hall and at other times in Slough Square, London at Loveday House.
We first meet you in 1917?
Yes, I joined the VADs (that's the Voluntary Aid Detachment for our readers who aren't members of the British Empire) having lied about my age. My father or Dadda as I call him, worked at the War office and could have got me called back for being underage. He argued with mother about this a great deal. In the end it turns out he let me stay. Mother hated this and we were estranged for quite a while. It’s funny really as she was an active suffragette before the war. Even got arrested for assaulting a police officer!
Did she go to prison?
Much to her disgust, no. The policeman took her home to Dadda, he was really annoyed with her, but of course understood, he often commented on the issue in the House of Lords.
But he let you continue?
Yes, he knew it was something I had to do. Also I wanted to be closer to my brother Alfie who was fighting out there.
Did you ever see your brother?
Ironically no. We were never in the same area. It was difficult not seeing him. He is my best pal.
What did you do during the war?
I drove ambulances. Alfie had taught me to drive on tractors, so it was quite simple really and I knew how to maintain the engine so that went down well.
Was it an awful experience?
Yes and no. Taking the wounded to the Dressing Station was horrible. The screaming from the back of my ambulance, then the washing it out at the end of the day. Blood and all sorts in the back, it was quite revolting.
Was there anything good about it?
I met some lovely people. We stayed in an old barn, it was really cosy and waterproof thank goodness and I met the love of my life.
Can you tell us about him?
Well actually, I’m not sure. I fell in love with a woman. I know I oughtn’t, but it’s true.
How did this happen?
I was driving my ambulance past a bombed out dressing station and saw her in the mud. She was holding a Canadian soldier and was covered in blood and mud. I helped her out and took her to the barn.
Where she stayed?
Yes, amazingly with all the red tape we get sunk under she was allowed to stay and join our nurses. Her name is Elodie Proux. We have to keep or love secret so I’m not sure you should print this.
We can be discreet, don’t worry.
Especially as the Canadian soldier had tried to rape her and she thinks she killed him …

Jonathan Wilkins writes contemporary and historical crime thrillers.
His Poppy Knows Best series starts in 1917, with Poppy Flowers At The Front and he plans to move it through to 1968. The third in the series is Poppy Blossoms Amongst The Dead. 
He also writes a contemporary series based in Utrecht, following Detective Caes Heda and his daughter Truus. Utrecht Rain is available from Amazon, whilst Utrech Snow is available direct from his website www.jonathanwilkins.co.uk, along with all his books.
You can learn more about Jonathan and his writing by following him on Facebook, Twitter (@leicesterstorys) or Instagram (@jonwilkins55)

Today's Tip is a writing exercise. It can be used to Bust the (writing) Block, as a practise exercise, or even as a way of crafting a difficult scene.
This is one of the most enjoyable exercises I have ever taken part in. It was an activity suggested by someone in Royston Writer's Circle, which I was a member of briefly about 10 years ago.
The goal of the activity is to practise describing a scene using all of your senses.
The activity works by rewriting the same scene repeatedly, using a different sense each time.
First, choose a scenario.
If you don't already have one in mind, you can use a random scene generator. There are loads on the internet, but this one is quite nice.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/writing-prompt.php

For most writers, the easiest and most natural sense to work with is sight. So we'll do that first.
Describe the scene visually.
What does it look like? If you are writing from the point of view of a character, what do they see?
I'm going to have a go at this (genuinely, I am doing it from scratch).
 
My character has entered a building where a murder has taken place.
 
Warren pushed open the door. The room beyond was dim, poorly lit, the only illumination a streetlight. He paused on the threshold, allowing his eyes time to adjust. The details of the room came slowly into focus. Before him was a double bed, covered in tangled white sheets. At first, it appeared empty, but as the shadows and shapes coalesced, the lump underneath the duvet resolved into a small, person-shaped form. What he'd thought was a shadow in the centre of the lump became a dark stain.
 
The next easiest sense to describe is hearing. What does the character hear? Rewrite the scene focusing solely on the sound.
 
Warren pushed open the door. The hinges squeaked and the bottom of the door made a sliding noise against the thick carpet. What struck him first was the stillness. The electricity had been disconnected days ago and no appliances hummed; it was as if the house was holding its breath. As he waited for his eyes to adjust, he became aware of the shuck of distant vehicles on the wet tarmac of the nearby road. Somewhere a tap dripped, the only sign of life in the whole building. That and the faint rustle of his breath in his surgical mask.
 
The remaining three senses are trickier to describe, and might not be relevant to the scene you are writing. But you'd be surprised what you can come up with.
 
First, touch.
 
Warren pushed open the door. He felt the slight resistance as the bottom of the door pushed against the carpet. His hands were sweaty inside his latex gloves, and he was uncomfortably aware of his warm breath, trapped within his face mask. The bedroom window had been left ajar, and the cool night breeze ruffled his hair.
 
Taste and smell are very similar senses that often overlap. For obvious reasons, Warren won't be licking anything he comes in contact with, but I can still find something.
 
Warren pushed open the door. He licked his top lip, coated in the salty tang of his sweat. From the moment he'd entered the house, his nose had hinted at what he would find. Now, standing on the threshold of the room, the smells familiar to every homicide detective filled his senses. The heavy metallic odour told him what had caused the dark stain in the centre of the duvet, and the sweet cloying stench informed him that whatever horrors had occurred here had taken place a couple of days previously.
 
The final step in this exercise is to take the best bits of each paragraph and blend them into a single passage. Be ruthless, and don't feel you have to shoehorn something from each of the senses into the final product. If you don't think taste adds anything, leave it out. If the house is silent, just say so, don't scrabble around for extra detail or torturous metaphors. Try and keep it short, you want to transport your reader, not bore them! Once you've done that, edit the hell out of it!
 
Warren pushed open the door. Without electricity, the house remained eerily still, the only sound the rustling of his warm breath beneath his mask. The smells familiar to every homicide detective already told him what to expect, as his eyes adjusted to the unlit room. The bump beneath the sheets coalesced into a small, human-shaped form; what appeared to be a shadow in the centre of the duvet resolved into the source of the heavy, metallic odour.
The sweet, cloying stench that had alerted the neighbours as it drifted through the open window, told him that whatever horrors had occurred here had taken place days previously.
 
Remember the rules:

• Set yourself a time limit.
• Write without stopping, editing or overthinking.
• Write whatever comes to mind and don't worry if it doesn't make sense.
• It doesn't matter if it has nothing to do with the scene that you are stuck on.

 
Do you have any suggestions for exercises to practise writing about the senses?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Happy writing,
Paul. 

Certain topics seem destined to divide readers. One such issue is whether a book, especially a crime novel, must have a concrete resolution, or can be deliberately left open to the reader's own interpretation.
Note: I'm not  talking about cliff hangers here. The purpose of a cliff hanger is to leave the reader waiting for the next instalment. This is an equally divisive topic, but not one I intend to look at here.
Most crime novels provide some sort of clear resolution at the end. Indeed, it is the certainty that, unlike in real-life, the villain will usually get their comeuppance that makes the genre so popular. In an uncertain world, it's good to know that in fiction at least, crimes will be punished and the perpetrator face justice.
Of course, that isn't a hard and fast rule. The culprit might actually get away with it, but the writer will usually tell the reader who did it, again providing resolution. The villain might escape justice, or go free to continue their crimes in later stories, but at least we the readers have the satisfaction of knowing if we were right or wrong.
But occasionally, writers buck that trend. Unfortunately, by its very nature, I can't give specific examples here - they would be huge spoilers and I'm not going to disrespect the writers or future readers by giving away any endings. However, there are some very good recent examples where resolution isn't given. In fact the reader is left to make up their own mind at the end.


I'm going to lay my cards on the table and say that I don't mind the occasional open-ending. In fact, there are certain books in which I believe that is the only ending which serves the story. These are the stories that make you think. That make you wonder what you might do in that solution, or decide who the culprit was.
But a lack of a clear answer seems to really upset some readers. Comments in a recent Facebook thread stated that if a reader wanted to write their own ending, they'd be a writer. Another poster suggested that it was a sign of lazy writing. Still others felt that it seemed as though the author had run out of ideas and just stopped writing.
Each to their own opinion, but I strongly disagree with the last two statements. In fact, I feel they are needlessly offensive, and I suspect that the posters would probably shy away from saying such a thing to an author's face. The anonymity of social media makes us all braver than we really are.


The fact is that everything in a book is a choice. And it is usually a choice that has been vetted by editors and beta-readers before the book is published. The likelihood is that author either knew when they started what the ending would be,  or, as the book unfolded, they saw that was the best and only ending that would satisfy them.
I would even go as far as to say that a deliberately ambiguous ending is more difficult to pull off effectively. Tipping the scales in favour of suspect A rather than suspect B is relatively easy. And as resolution is typically expected, the reader will usually accept your decision. On the other hand, crafting the book so that decision is up in the air, so that your readers are divided over the culprit or what happens next, is a real skill.
But, as the heated debates show, making such a decision can be fraught with danger.
So what should you consider if you feel that your book should be left unresolved?
Give enough clues that the readers can decide for themselves.
The best thing about an open-ending done properly is that the book lingers with the readers, rather than closing with, 'and the suspect was arrested, and they all lived happily ever after. The End', leaving the reader free to pick up another book immediately. What you want is for the reader to stop and think. For them to find themselves trying to work out who did it, or what they think will happen next.
Ensure that there are compelling reasons for either interpretation of the ending.
To pull this off, it is vital that either interpretation is plausible. If 99% of your readers are convinced it was suspect A, or that the victim was murdered, rather than dying as a result of an accident or suicide, then the chances are that they are just going to be left wondering why you didn't say that at the end.
Never use it as an excuse to avoid making difficult decisions.
We all write ourselves into corners occasionally (see TuesdayTip98), but as a writer it is part of our job to figure a way out of that dead end. If you decide the best way to solve this problem is to just leave it up to the reader, it will probably backfire. You need to decide whether you should work harder to make that decision, or if you should go back and make sure that an open-ending is fair on the reader (see above) and a genuine creative choice.
Decide if this is genuinely an open-ending or a cliff-hanger.
When writing a series, it is tempting to try and hook the reader into feeling compelled to buy the next in the series. One way to do this would be to have the investigator come close to solving the mystery, then as the culprit is about to be revealed, basically tell the reader to read the next in the series to receive that answer.
DON'T!!! This is a very manipulative and dishonest way of getting people to buy your next book, and you will quite rightly be hammered in the reviews for it. That's a cliff-hanger, not an open-ending. It belongs at the end of a chapter not the end of a book. You have cheated the reader.
It's fine to have an ongoing investigation spread over several books, but you still have to reward the reader at the end of each book with something. Perhaps have a person arrested for the crime, but have your investigator realise that they are just part of a bigger plot? That way the reader feels satisfied, but is now excited to read what happens next.
Maintain an air of mystery.
Something you need to be prepared for is for readers to ask you 'so who actually did it'? My advice is to not commit to an answer. It's fine to have your own theory. And that might even change over time. But I think it's better to state that you have your own thoughts on the matter, but that you are more interested to hear what they think.

​So, where do you stand on open-endings? Should a book always have a firm resolution, or do you enjoy being left to make up your own mind?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time, all the best.
Paul.

Where do you go next when your last book had half a dozen victims?

As writers, we always want to improve our craft. We want our next book to be better than the last. We owe it to our readers, and we owe it to ourselves.

But as in so much of life, there can be a perception that better means bigger.
So, to repeat the question, where do you go next, when your last book had half a dozen victims? Do you kill seven this time? Eight?
Clearly that would soon get ridiculous. Lee Child's Jack Reacher series numbers over twenty entries, and whilst Reacher can be a one-man wrecking crew at times, the body count is rarely that high!

Over the course of my DCI Warren Jones series, I have resisted the urge to try and make the next story "bigger". In fact I have deliberately switched between "big" stories and "smaller" stories.
But what does that mean? First of all, it has nothing to do with wordcount. Each of my full-length novels is the same length, plus or minus about 10%.

Rather, I define a story as Big or Small based on the impact that the central murder or murders have on wider society.

Murder invariably has an impact beyond the immediate victim. Like throwing a stone into a pond, the ripples extend to effect the all those around them. Friends, family and loved ones of the deceased are affected, for good or bad. The same can be said for the killer - murder is not an act to be undertaken lightly, and the consequences of a life sentence can also be felt by those associated with them. And, whilst every death is a catastrophe in its own way, some leave a bigger impression on society than others.

Yet a Small story should be no less compelling than a Big story. A meaty thriller with a serial killer who kills multiple victims is by definition a Big Story. That story is composed of many individual tragedies and the ripples can be felt far and wide. A Small story allows for greater study of an individual tragedy. The ripples might not travel as far, but the author can spend more time with those affected. The investigation at the heart of the novel can still be as complex and twisty, but there is no need for a escalating body count to satisfy readers.

I like to write a mix of stories whose impact is either big or small. The first in the Warren Jones series, The Last Straw, concerns the murder of a university professor. And whilst we meet an ever-widening pool of suspects, with multiple motives, the ripples are largely contained within that pool. On the other hand, book 2, No Smoke Without Fire, is about a serial rapist and murderer. There are multiple victims. Each is its own tragedy, and we spend time with their loved ones, but there is understandably a wider effect on the wider community. Who will be next? Should those in the surrounding area be concerned about their own and loved one's safety?

The ripples can be felt in other ways. The central murder in The Common Enemy is that of a far-right extremist. The consequences here would seem to be contained to his loved ones (and whilst he was a deeply unpleasant character, few people travel through life without at least someone who cares for them and will miss them). However, Middlesbury is a powder keg of racial tension at this time, and the death of this one man has the potential to spill over into far greater conflict, so I would class this as a Big story.

The latest two entries in the series, Out of Sight, and this summer's Time To Kill are an example of each type of story. Out of Sight deals with the killing of a lonely man with a secret life. He's ostracised by his family, but as we find out, he still had many who cared for him, however the ripples are largely contained within his circle. Time To Kill has Warren and his team uncover unexpected links between seemingly unrelated deaths. Once it becomes apparent that anyone could be next, the ripples are more akin to those caused by throwing a large rock into a pond, rather than a pebble.

The take home message here, is that a better story doesn't have to be a Bigger story. It isn't necessary to raise the body count or even raise the stakes to keep a series improving. A small intimate study of a single death can be just as good as a wide-ranging investigation into a bloodbath. The next book in a series can still be better than the previous without needing to throw a larger stone into the pond.

What are your thoughts? Do you feel that once an author has "gone large" they need to continue with those Big books whose ripples extend far and wide, or can they dial it back in the next book and focus on a single death that is important to those in the victim's immediate circle but of limited concern to the rest of the society?

As always, feel free to share your thoughts her or on social media.

Until next time,
best wishes,
Paul.

For this week's #TuesdayTip, I am thrilled to invite Jason Monaghan back to share his "Plot Spider" method for writing a second draft. Jason previously shared his "Filleted Fish" method for a first draft, so if you haven't done so already, I recommend having a read of that as well.

Jason is an author and archaeologist, now back working in his native Yorkshire after many travels. His career has taken unexpected twists including becoming a bank director, anti-money laundering specialist, shipwreck archaeologist and museum director. All of which creates plenty of inspiration for his thrillers, of which the latest is Blackshirt Masquerade published by the Historia imprint of Level Best books. He has also written the Jeffrey Flint archaeological thriller series available from Lume Books and is an active member of the Crime Writers Association.

Jason's Tip
My very spare ‘filleted fish’ first draft will be around 40,000 words, and when I’m convinced that I have a whole potential novel I draw what I call my ‘plot spider’. This used to be on paper, but I now employ a wipe board to mark up with characters, organisations and incidents connected with coloured lines. While this information may already be in my head it is a well- known design principle that presenting a plan graphically engages different parts of the mind, feeding creativity.
In the centre will be whatever is at the core of the novel, so in the case of Blackshirt Masquerade it is the British Union of Fascists in a big black circle. I link my hero and the other characters to the central circle and each other. More organisations are added around the edges: MI5, Special Branch, the Communist Party and so on.
Annotations will be added to the links, such as ‘girlfriend’, ‘witness’, or ‘kills’. Major incidents are drawn in red starbursts, linking to affected people. During this process, it becomes clear where gaps in the logic of the plot need to be filled. How did those people meet? Who is this character really working for? How does he unmask the villains? Key clues are also flagged, with links to who discovers them and how. In my Jeffrey Flint books the plots were constructed like an onion, with concealing layers that needed to be stripped away one by one.
After only an hour or two I have a messy piece of modern art and grubby hands. I take a snap on my phone for reference.
I often draw a second diagram as a villains-eye view. It shows the underlying plot, the one the reader doesn’t see and my heroes will only uncover piece by piece. This cross-checks the logic of the bad guys, what they hope to gain and how they respond as the heroes draw closer.
Thrillers generally have several threads to the plot which are gradually twisted together or are revealed to be red herrings. A sub-plot such as a romance or personal crisis of a lead character may need its own resolution. I use the wipe board again to make a plot list, colour coded for each strand, making sure each has its genesis and resolution – or is deliberately left hanging for the sequel. This points up plot lines that are undernourished and where more clues or twists are needed. Each thread is written onto a calendar so they can ultimately converge in a logical manner, and in a historical thriller also march in step with actual events.
Finally I’m ready to write Draft 2, aiming for 70,000 words or so in which the plot, sub-plots, clues and resolution are all there. It’s still not fit to show anyone, but at least I can start talking about ‘my next book’.
(c) Jason Monaghan 2022

You can learn more about Jason by visiting his website and Facebook page or following him on Twitter @Jasonthriller or Instagram @docmonaghan.

What do you think of Jason's "Plot Spider" method, or his "Filleted Fish" method?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.

​Until next time, best wishes,
Paul
Are you a writer with a tip to share? If so, please feel free to contact me here, or via email/social media. 👇

Today's warm-up exercise is another favourite of writing classes; telling the same story from two different perspectives.
As with all of these exercises, you might have an idea for a scene already, but if you are struggling for inspiration, why not use an image as a prompt? Ideally, you want a scene with two different people in it.
This website automatically delivers random images.
https://writingexercises.co.uk/random-image-generator.php
Alternatively, you can just go to Google Images and type "2 people on a park bench".
Look at the two people.

• First of all, ask yourself who they are.
• Do they already know each other - if so, what is their relationship?
• What is the conversation about?
• Perhaps there is no conversation - in which case are they thinking about the other person, or are they both in their own world?

One approach would be to imagine a conversation between them. The dialogue is the same in each version of the scene, but the emotions and feeling may be different. What about their inner monologue?
For example, imagine a man and woman sitting next to each other. Is one attracted to the other? Is the other person flattered by the attention or put off?
The aim of this exercise, in addition to hopefully breaking you out of your writer's block, is to practise  empathising with different characters. To accessing their inner monologue and feelings, and to then try it from a different point of view.
Remember the rules:

• Set yourself a time limit.
• Write without stopping, editing or overthinking.
• Write whatever comes to mind and don't worry if it doesn't make sense.
• It doesn't matter if it has nothing to do with the scene that you are stuck on.

Do you have any ideas for busting writer's block? If so, share them below or on social media.


Until next time, happy writing.
Paul

Today's #TuesdayTip is a very special anniversary - so how better to mark the 100th Tuesday Tip than by launching a new feature!
I am absolutely delighted that my good friend Leigh Russell has agreed to write the inaugural #ConversationsWithTheirCreations.
The premise is simple - an author conducts an interview with one of their characters. I leave it up to them how they wish to interpret that brief.

Leigh will be interviewing Detective Inspector Geraldine Steel, the main character in 17 of her best-selling novels, most recently Guilt Edged.

Presenter: Good morning, and welcome to all our listeners. Today on Radio Gitsham, we are pleased to welcome a special guest, Detective Inspector Geraldine Steel. Good afternoon, Inspector. I’m sure our listeners have all read about your latest murder investigation, which was widely reported in the press, but what can you tell us about it from behind the scenes at the police station? 
Geraldine: Hello, and thank you for inviting me to join you.  My latest case was extremely challenging for me and my team, because we were dealing with an attack that appeared to be completely motiveless. No one seemed to benefit from the victim’s death, and he appeared to have lived a quiet life, making no enemies at all. With no leads, it was down to me and my team to track down his killer. 
Presenter: That sounds tricky. So how did you go about it? 
Geraldine:  An individual’s DNA was detected on the body, and we were able to find a match for it on our database and arrest a suspect. At that point, the investigation seemed to be over, although I had my doubts as to whether we had arrested the right person. When a credible independent eye witness came forward to confirm the suspect’s alibi, I made the decision to release him. But sadly, not long after that, a second victim was murdered. 
Presenter: Were you worried that you had made the wrong decision in releasing the original suspect? 
Geraldine: It would have been a terrible injustice to keep an innocent man locked up for a crime he hadn’t committed. But since I had been responsible for the decision to let the suspect go, I spent a few sleepless nights worrying that I had made a terrible mistake, and my error of judgement had led to the death of a young woman. It isn’t my responsibility as a detective to convict anyone. My job is to establish the facts in a case so a court is able reach the right decision about who is guilty and who is innocent. But sometimes difficult choices are forced on us and we all have to live with the consequences of our decisions.
Presenter: It sounds like a complex case, but you did resolve it all in the end, didn’t you? 
Geraldine: Yes, it was a complicated investigation, but I can assure your listeners that my team succeeded in tracking down the killer in the end. We always do. That is our job. 
Presenter: I’m sure we’re all relieved to hear that. Thank you very much for joining us today.
Geraldine: It’s been a pleasure, and thank you for inviting me to the studio to talk to you.
(c) 2022 Leigh Russell

Known as a crime writer, Leigh Russell has had 27 novels published, including the million selling Geraldine Steel detective series. She has also written psychological thrillers, dystopian and historical fiction. In addition to her writing, Leigh is Chair of Judges for the CWA Debut Dagger, and a Consultant Royal Literary Fellow. She runs occasional creative writing courses in the UK and overseas, and online during lockdown.

The Geraldine Steel series features a detective inspector working on murder investigations. 
The first title in the series, CUT SHORT, was published in 2012 
The most recent is GUILT EDGED, published January 2022  

To learn more about Leigh and her writing, you can visit her website or follow her on Twitter @LeighRussell and Facebook.

For this week's #TuesdayTip, I am thrilled to invite Jason Monaghan to share his "Filleted Fish" method for writing a first draft.  Stay tuned for a later tip, when he will be sharing his "Plot Spider" method for writing a second draft.

Jason is an author and archaeologist, now back working in his native Yorkshire after many travels. His career has taken unexpected twists including becoming a bank director, anti-money laundering specialist, shipwreck archaeologist and museum director. All of which creates plenty of inspiration for his thrillers, of which the latest is Blackshirt Masquerade published by the Historia imprint of Level Best books. He has also written the Jeffrey Flint archaeological thriller series available from Lume Books and is an active member of the Crime Writers Association.

Jason's Tip
Writers’ approaches to creating their first draft are classically discussed as ‘pantsers’ who write beginning to end and ‘plotters’ who map it all out before they begin. My approach is something in between, with the first draft resembling one of those filleted fish that a cartoon cat finds in a bin. It has a head, a tail, a backbone and a few ribs.
A plot comes to me as if I’m remembering a movie that I saw many years ago. There’s a shooting, but a man is running towards it; why? Who was the target and why did the shooter miss? It’s something to do with Blackshirt fascists and spies. Ideas start to build as I daydream in the shower or doing the washing up, and pretty soon I begin to write. In parallel I’ll commence background research for the historical period, geographic locations and technical detail. Facts will be dropped in as I find them, correcting the text if necessary.
I write the opening chapters pantser-style, knowing that the first pages will probably be replaced or heavily reworked as it is critical that the opening grabs both publisher and readers. This is the ‘head’, and the developing plot becomes the backbone. I’ll write the key action scenes, major character moments and big twists that become the ribs of the story. The first draft comes out as a stream of consciousness, jumping from one scene to another, not necessarily in sequence. It’s deliberately spare, with dialogue just using ‘he said/she said’ and omitting most of the animation, the setting down of teacups or anxiously glancing out of the window. That will come in later drafts once I’m certain I need that scene and it is worthwhile proceeding to polish it.
This methodology works for me, but it’s not the most efficient way to write. It came about due to time pressures of fitting writing around a day job, family commitments and academic research. Also, my thrillers don’t follow the linear sequence of crime to clue to suspect to resolution as employed in a classic police procedural. Several plot threads wind in and out before becoming tied together in the climax, and a fair amount of re-arranging of the ‘ribs’ will be needed in later drafts.
The filleted fish needs a tail, so I’ll write the ending fairly early as I need to know where the story is going. Loose ends need to be tied up, villains identified, and seeds planted for a sequel. I aim to have about 40,000 words in the first draft if the final target is 90-100k. The lead characters are all there, as is the main plot, and it has a beginning, middle and end. It’s not something I’d want anyone else to read, but I have a story. 
(c) Jason Monaghan 2022

You can learn more about Jason by visiting his website and Facebook page or following him on Twitter @Jasonthriller or Instagram @docmonaghan.

What do you think of Jason's "Filleted Fish" method?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Stay tuned for Jason's second post in a few weeks time and stop by next week, when I celebrate 100 Tuesday Tips by launching a new feature ...

Are you a writer with a tip to share? If so, please feel free to contact me here, or via email/social media. 👇

One of the pitfalls of writing without a plan, and going where the story leads you, is that sometimes you write yourself into a corner.
Nothing feels worse, fifty-thousand words into a novel, to find that a decision that seemed like a brilliant plot twist twenty-thousand words earlier, has rendered the fantastic idea you've been building towards unworkable.
The gut-churning feeling that your awesome story might need to be completely re-tooled or even scrapped, and the feeling that finally, this will be the book where your wing-and-a-prayer method might finally let you down, can lead to sleepless nights and a crippling attack of imposter syndrome.
Yet it happens to the best of us, and although it may feel like the end-of-the-world, it usually isn't.
Sure there are plenty of horror stories of people scrapping their work in progress. Of writers filled with professional shame as they email their agent or publisher to break the news that the manuscript they'd confidently promised three months ago will not be delivered on time. Of publishers having to push back publication dates.

But what you don't hear about is those writers that overcome the hurdle. Who have a sudden flash of inspiration that fixes everything and leads to the best book of their career. We tend not to talk about it. Perhaps we should? Perhaps we shouldn't be embarrassed to brag about it?

In fact, I would go as far to say that writing yourself into a corner can be a good thing!
Yes, you read that correctly! Because we writers are fighters. When our backs are against the wall, we come out swinging. Solving that insurmountable problem forces us to be more creative.

So how can we solve the unsolvable, and salvage months of work? Here are a couple of suggestions. Think of them more as a basic principle, rather than a concrete suggestion.

Shoot Someone.
There is a quote, widely attributed to Raymond Chandler, "When stumped, have a man come through a door with a gun."
There are questions over whether this was advice, or just a description of how he used to work when writing pulp fiction.
But, it can solve a problem. If you are heading down an alley with a dead-end, then shake things up. Add a big twist, like a man with a gun. Coincidences are frowned upon in crime fiction - yet sometimes they do happen. So why not acknowledge that your investigator has been chasing a spurious lead and give them another victim or a clue that makes them realise they were on the wrong track? A need to reset and start again. Do it right and your error becomes a twist that your readers never saw coming, because you had no idea it was going to happen either!
Change The Culprit.
Even pantsers who start with little in the way of a plan often know who did it. But with no clear route  plotted, it's all too easy to end up in that corner, with thousands of words that no longer lead anywhere. It's rather like setting out on a road trip knowing roughly which direction your final destination is in, but missing the correct exit on the motorway and having to either double-back or take a tortuous route cross-country on poorly-lit, narrow backroads.
So ask yourself, how wedded are you to that culprit? Again, done correctly, your misstep becomes a fantastic twist that takes everyone by surprise.
Bring In A New Character.
Sometimes the problem is a result of having eliminated too many suspects too early on. In which case changing the culprit (as above) can change the game. Alternately, perhaps invent a new character. Introduce them early in the story as a potential suspect and shift some of the spade work you've done eliminating another character onto their shoulders.
For example, imagine you have two brothers, both suspects (but ultimately innocent), one of whom you want to be in the running until the last couple of chapters. You've been busy setting up the reasons why they will ultimately be eliminated, and suddenly, with a hundred pages to go, neither of them are viable suspects anymore, meaning that the real culprit is now too obvious! You could go back and remove all that deduction. Or they could have a third brother. Then two brothers are eliminated, but the third one is still a plausible suspect.
The caveat. One of the informal rules in crime writing is that the culprit should be introduced early in the book. To give your readers a fighting chance, this new character must at least be mentioned in the first few chapters. Suddenly introduce them after the half-way point, and the chances are your readers will feel cheated.
It Was All A Dream.
Just kidding, that's a really bad idea.

How do you write yourself back out of that corner?
As always, feel free to comment here or on social media.
Until next time,
Paul

Sometimes, overcoming writer's block is about getting started. It's about building a head of steam, so that you are ready to take a run at the day's goals. I've written previously about writing prompts. Beloved of creative writing classes, they are a great way of warming up.
The rules are straightforward.

• Set yourself a time limit.
• Write without stopping, editing or overthinking.
• Write whatever comes to mind and don't worry if it doesn't make sense.
• It doesn't matter if it has nothing to do with the scene that you are stuck on.

This exercise involves choosing three words, then writing whatever comes to mind - the goal is to write something which incorporates all three words.
Again, the brilliant website Writing Exercises has a tool that can help.
https://writingexercises.co.uk/random-words-exercises.php
This generates eight words. The original tool suggests that you incorporate all eight. I am going to suggest using just the first three, to keep to a short time limit, but it's up to you.
Again, this is a free write exercise, so it's all about the writing, not the content. It doesn't matter if the end result is gibberish, it's about unlocking potential.
Once you've finished your piece, resist the urge to pat yourself on the back and go for a coffee - open your manuscript and start work. Fingers crossed, that creative spark will have set the wheel's in motion.
Do you have any suggestions for overcoming writer's block?
As always, feel free to share your thoughts in the comments or on social media.
Happy writing!
Paul