A few weeks go, I received the structural edits for DCI Warren Jones 8. At the same time that they landed in my inbox, I started reading a book by a very well-known giant of the crime thriller genre. Now before you try and guess what book it was, and who it was by, don't bother. The book is a few years old  and as a professional courtesy, that's all you're getting.
What is the link, I hear you ask?
Editing. Or rather the fact that nobody is too big to edit.
On the whole, the feedback for book 8 was actually very good. My editor really liked the story and thought that it would be popular with my readers. But she had some suggestions; primarily about pace, shortening the book, moving some of the key revelations earlier to keep things moving quickly and perhaps cutting or trimming some set-pieces.
Intellectually, I know she is right, and her advice is always extremely good and valued. But like all writers, I feel somewhat possessive about my book baby. It represents many months of hard work, including a lot of editing both before and after my beta readers went through it. Leaving aside my ego, I always feel, when I hand in that first manuscript submission, that my work is done, and I never want to see the damn book again.
Of course this is nonsense, and it is also the same reaction as most authors.
By the time I received these edits, I was already well into my next project and so a small part of me resents putting that aside to pick up something that emotionally I felt I was done with.


Boo hoo.
Suck it up, that's part of the job.


In fact, after a few days of tearing my hair out and wondering how the hell I was going to do what was asked of me, the old excitement returned, as the ideas started to flow.
The book will be better by the time I hand it back, and I will feel even more satisfied with my effort, and my editor will get the credit she deserves.


The fact is, whether you are traditionally published, or independently published, a seasoned writer of decades experience, or a nervous debut, a professional editor is essential, and you will not convince me otherwise.
I don't get to choose my editor, they are assigned by my publisher, but I have been extremely fortunate over the years. Every suggestion that she has made has been thoughtful and smart. That doesn't mean I will be implementing them all. In fact, the accompanying editorial letter acknowledges that - for narrative reasons - it would be impossible to follow them all, because some would essentially contradict each other, or make things too complicated. Rather, I have been given food for thought and a series of choices. How I use them is up to me; ultimately, it is my name on the cover.
So back to the book I am reading. I have enjoyed this author's writing for many years, but a few books back, I felt they started to dip. The reasons are many, but primarily there is too much backstory with numerous characters that have over-stayed their welcome. The books have become more of a soap opera with a couple of very cool ideas thrown in to justify them being crime thrillers. The author is writing to their target audience now; those fans who will pick up the next in the series without even thinking about it. And I think it's a real shame, because they've lost something special.


It feels arrogant of me to pretend I can critique someone who was selling more copies a week than I sell in a year, two decades before I even completed my first novel. Yet perhaps that is the problem. I suspect that somewhere along the line, they became "too big to edit".
The latest novel is a case in point. It is basically a short story stretched to fill 400 pages. The first 100 pages are essentially about the lead character's woes. We don't even find out there has been a death. The next 200 pages (genuinely, I'm not exaggerating) are at the crime scene.
Now I love a bit of backstory - it's why I enjoy a series. The prose is also extremely good; this is a very experienced writer with a confident and assured writing style and a strong voice. But I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that had I submitted something similar, my editor would have immediately sent it back.  The editorial letter would have been encouraging, kind and professional, but would essentially have said thus: Too slow. Cut the first 60 pages. Bring the death forward. Get them to the morgue before page 75. Do we need all these characters? Who are persons X,Y and Z and why do we care about them? We get that these characters have a complicated history, but you don't need to keep on telling us. Cut back on the technical detail, it's not a manual. Can you introduces some more tension, it's too slow burn? etc etc.
And perhaps that's why I'm not a multi-millionaire and they are?
But, despite that I still can't help think that the book would have benefitted from a damn good edit. The sad thing is that I probably won't read anything more by this writer;  they peaked several books ago and now they are just a cash cow. And that's a real shame.
What are your thoughts on the editing process?
As always, feel free to share here or on social media.
Best wishes,
Paul 

For this week's tip, I am delighted to welcome GB Williams. 
GB Specialises in fast paced, contemporary crime that doesn’t hide from harsh reality (not too much gore). She says "Nor do I hide from the fact that people have a heart, I will run through the gamut of emotion, and sometimes make the reader cry. There are many elements in my work, but it’s all about people and what they go through." 

GB's Writing Tip
Read out loud. 
When you think you’re ready to go, think again and read your work aloud. It doesn’t matter what genre you’re writing, or where you are on your publishing journey, to know if your manuscript works or not, the best way is to read it out loud.
This is a struggle for most authors, but stick with it. No one expects you to go all Shakespearean, enunciating each syllable and clipping every vowel, but it is important to know that the words sound right when read out. Reading aloud will highlight a lot of issues you would otherwise not know were there, and the various grammar checkers won’t tell you either. 
The inability to listen to your own voice doesn’t exclude you doing this either. There are many programmes which will read your work out for you. They are utterly expressionless, but I find that means I don’t get caught up in the story, I listen to the actual words and mistakes jump out. The latest versions of Word have a read to me option, as does the free download of Adobe, not sure about Pages as I don’t have a Mac, but I suspect that something is available for Mac users too.
Reading aloud also has another benefit, it lets you know what is easy/difficult to actually say.  There’s a surprising difference between what we can read in our heads and what we can read aloud. The added benefit of course, is that should your book got to audio, you’ve made life easier for the actor reading it.

GB specialises in complex, fast-paced crime novels, most recently, “The Chair”, but also the “Locked Trilogy”.  GB was shortlisted for the 2014 CWA Margery Allingham Short Story Competition with the story Last Shakes, now available in Last Cut Casebook. Crime novels are her stock in trade, but she has had success with short stories in other genres including steampunk, horror, and erotica, and has penned a successful steampunk series. She has a husband and two grown up children, not to mention the worlds most imperious demanding cat. GB is such a cat slave, even the neighbourhood cats come demanding dinner. Now working as a fulltime writer and freelance structural editor. GB hates every photo ever taken of her.
She is published by Black Bee Books.

To learn more about her and her writing, visit her website or her Facebook page.
Or you can follow her on Twitter @GailBWilliams or Instagram @gbwilliamsauthor.

It's time to tackle another thorny subject! Today I want to look at "The Male Gaze".
Before we start, remember that I am writing from the perspective of a middle-aged, heterosexual male, and so that is doubtless reflected in my opinions (translation: don't shoot the messenger!).

For those not familiar with this phrase, that until relatively recently was largely confined to scholarly studies, it refers to the way in which men describe or portray women's bodies, or represent their sexuality in art.
The easiest way to explain it is to start by using TV or movies as visual examples, before moving onto the written word (by the way, I love the Carry On films, so the image above is not a criticism of these wonderful examples of British humour).

Much of the film industry is still run by male directors and cinematographers and all too often, this is reflected in the choice of shots and camera angles in these scenes. How many times have you seen a naked couple lying in bed, the bedsheets artfully concealing their lower bodies, but the female actor is topless, whilst her male counterpart is largely covered? 
What about during sex scenes? There are sweeping camera shots of the female actor's sweaty body, leaving little to the imagination, whilst her male colleague is barely shown. How many times have you seen a female actor showering or bathing in intimate, lingering detail, whilst (Hugh Jackman aside) there is barely a bare male bottom in sight?

In crime dramas, female murder victims are often lying naked on a mortuary table in the background, whilst the detectives discuss the case with the pathologist. Not only is this often gratuitous, it's also unrealistic. Those who work within morgues, treat their patients with dignity. The body will be covered to preserve their modesty until it is necessary to remove the sheet to perform the autopsy, then they will be covered again. 

Comic books are infamous for the way in which male superheroes wear sensible, practical costumes, whilst their female counterparts wear tight, gravity-defying bodices with their cleavage spilling out, and tiny miniskirts. I laughed out loud when, in a recent season of Supergirl, she was given a new version of the iconic suit and was delighted when it had trousers (pants) rather than her traditional red miniskirt!
A number of high-profile actors have become so fed up with what often feels like an unnecessary sop to male fantasies, that they will no longer perform intimate scenes unless they are directed by a female. 

In literature, there exists the same phenomenon, almost exclusively in books written by male authors. Female characters are described in forensic detail, whilst all we know about our male is protagonist is that he has brown hair and dark eyes.
Many of the most egregious examples are shared on social media, and held up for ridicule. So if you don't want your literary masterpiece being discussed by the Twitterati for all the wrong reasons, let's look at how to avoid falling into these old habits.
(Note: I am going to assume that you aren't specifically writing erotica, in which case the rules are obviously different).

Points to consider.
Women don't, as a rule, frequently spend lengthy periods of time in front of a mirror considering their naked body.
And if, for strong narrative reasons, such a scene is necessary, there's rarely any need to relate their inner monologue in intimate detail, for several paragraphs!
Less Is More.
This is a rule that is applicable to all manner of description, but especially important here. Is it really necessary to describe your female character's breasts in such intimate detail? Do you absolutely have to spend ages devising graphic metaphors so that the reader knows exactly what their nipples look like?
Let The Reader's Imagination Fill In The Details.
For example:
It was clear to see how the young woman had captured his attention. Tall and slim, her short skirt revealed smooth, toned legs, her lightly-tanned thighs soft like pillows. Her breasts were large, but not too large, barely constrained by her vest top, the indentations of her nipples revealing that she had neglected to wear a bra ... Etc etc etc.
How about instead:
It was clear to see how the young woman had captured his attention. Tall and slim, in a short skirt, and a revealing top that left little to the onlooker's imagination, she wouldn't have looked out of place on a catwalk. 
I'm certainly not claiming any literary greatness for what I have just written, but rather than painting a picture in toe-curling, forensic detail, why not just give a few tantalising brushstrokes and let the reader do the work?
Are You Projecting Your Own Fantasies?
As writers, we often have a strong image in our mind's eye of what our characters look like. But unless it's directly relevant to the plot, be sparing with the detail. One of the reasons that books are so wonderfully immersive, is that whilst a great writer is able to conjure up a picture in their readers' minds, the form that a character takes is ultimately determined by each individual reader. I have a clear image of what Harry Bosch looks like - and it isn't anything like Titus Welliver who portrays him on screen. And it probably wouldn't be recognisable to Michael Connelly or the millions of other readers of his books.
It's also quite common for authors to  have one of their characters representing their ideal woman (or man). It's generally harmless and part of the fun of being a writer. But I'd urge you not to spend a disproportionate amount of time describing that person. Keep a bit back for yourself!
Do Men And Women Get Equal Billing?
Go through your character descriptions with a critical eye. How many lines do you spend describing a male character? How many do you use to portray an equally important female character? Is there a big disparity? What about language? Think about the types of descriptors you use - are they factual (hair colour, height etc) or objective (voluptuous, pretty etc) - there's nothing wrong with either, but are your male characters described in the same way as your female characters?
Ask An Expert!
It's a generalisation, but if you are a male writer and aren't sure if your male gaze is asserting itself, why not ask a woman for her opinion on your rough draft?

What are your thoughts on the male gaze? What about the female gaze - it surely exists, but is it as prevalent, or as awkward?

Feel free to comment here, or on social media.
Best wishes,
Paul.