2013 IA SCBWI Conference-Part II

Louise650

First Pages practice
On the pitcher’s mound: Louise Aamodt

If you’re a children’s book writer, one of the best ways to hone your craft is to attend your regional Society of Children’s Book Writers & Illustrators (SCBWI) conferences. For instance: the 2013 Iowa SCBWI Conference offered a variety of hands-on manuscript development opportunities:

  • Roundtable Peer Critiques
  • First Page Readings
  • Manuscript Reviews

Roundtable Peer Critiques

Conference peer reviews provide fresh, unbiased feedback for our work-in-progress. Also, they widen our circle of writing friends, broaden our view of the world, and challenge us to write at a higher level.

For the peer critiques Iowa SCBWI Assistant Regional Advisor Lisa Morlock divided the manuscripts by genre, then she organized us into groups of four or five. Lisa emailed the manuscripts to each pertaining group member so we could review and print critiques (or bring them in e-form) before the conference.

Accomplished author Sharelle Byars Moranville facilitated my group, which consisted of three other chapter book and middle grade novelists. To top off the great advice we received from one another, she suggested we give all characters a crucible moment;  deliver the empathy-building essence of our protagonists; and strategically plan for pivotal stepping moments at the quarter point, the mid point, and the three-quarter point of our manuscripts before tying it up with that satisfying ending.

Elevator pitch practice Up to bat: Alicia Schwab

Elevator pitch practice
Up to bat: Alicia Schwab

First Page Readings

Michelle Poploff, Vice President and Executive Director of Delacorte Press Books for Young Readers, led “Finding Your Voice”, a session where First Page participants received a wealth of feedback in minutes. Participant names were randomly drawn. They read the first 500 words of their manuscripts. After each reading, attendees in the audience provided anonymous  comments on notecards.

In our motel room the night before, my roommates and I took turns rehearsing and creating one-line elevator pitch synopses.  Not only did the pitch-writing exercise equip all four of us to create more impactful queries; but the extra preparation paid off in the performances. When my roommates names were drawn, they delivered self-assured readings preceded by convincing pitches.

Elise Hylden Up to bat

Elise Parsley up to bat, critiquing the pitch

Manuscript Critiques

Face-to-face manuscript critiques provided the best opportunity to have our most polished, unpublished manuscript critiqued by an editor, agent, or published author. We submitted our manuscripts three to four weeks prior to the conference to allow ample time for our advisor to review and write comments; then we received a ten-minute appointment for them to tell us what worked, what didn’t, and how to improve our work.

Thanks to Joanna Cardenas, Assistant Editor for Viking Children’s Books, for reviewing my manuscript. She devoted an impressive amount of thoughtful consideration, offering suggestions on character development, plot and structure, language and diction, voice, and marketability. Her advice differed substantially from input I had received from Barry Goldblatt, founder of BG Literary, at the 2013 Minnesota Conference. However, their foundational goals remained the same: to increase my protagonist’s likeability, which would increase the appeal of my manuscript, which would increase its chances of being published. I’m grateful to them both.

Next week I’ll share more 2013 IA Conference wisdom from Michelle Poploff; Allison Remcheck, Assistant Literary Agent of Rosemary Stimola Literary Studio; Joanna Cardenas; and Jennifer Black Reinhardt. See you then!

2013 Iowa SCBWI Conference Photos

Now what?

Aruthur Rackham's illustration from GOLDILOCKS AND THE THREE BEARS from the Project Gutenberg archives.

Aruthur Rackham’s illustration from GOLDILOCKS AND THE THREE BEARS from the Project Gutenberg archives.

So, you’ve subjected your manuscript to writers’ conference reviews.

  • Papa Editor says your manuscript is too soft/lame/dull.
  • Mama Agent says it is too hard/scary/implausible.
  • And your Baby Peer Group says it is just right, except for a few hundred nagging flaws.

Now what?

  • Sleep until noon.
  • Eat bon-bons.
  • Complain on Facebook that editors, agents, and other writers don’t know their succotash from Shinola.

Just kidding!

Post manuscript review steps

1. Detach

  • Know that your reason for living is not dependent on those 600/9000/48,000 words.
  • To avoid burn out and increase objectivity, let the project rest in a drawer for two weeks or more.
  • Start another project. Many successful authors juggle several manuscripts at once. Epiphanies often occur while focusing on something else.

2. Look for middle ground

Note opposing revision suggestions. You can’t incorporate both, so see if the middle ground makes sense.

For instance, one manuscript reviewer advised that I intensify a storm scene to make it scarier. The next suggested that volatile weather may be too scary for children.

Because of favorable input received earlier from a test group, I plan to meet in the middle and leave the storm as is. If I didn’t feel confident and couldn’t decide which advice was best, I would save my original manuscript, rename and rewrite it  the two suggested ways, and select the best.

Writing exercises are never wasted.

3. Note common threads

Listen and check your notes for common threads of advice. This indicates a weak point. A common thread regarding my aforementioned manuscript is a preference for a supporting character over the protagonist.

To improve the manuscript according to this feedback, I can:

  • change my protagonist to make him/her stand out.
  • advance the supporting character to the rank of protagonist, knowing this may change the genre, theme, and story.
  • create an entirely new protagonist.

What critique advice have you heard more than once?

4. Note common sense

An editor noticed a scene where I had gotten sidetracked. I tend to be a bit attention deficit. SQUIRREL! To compensate for the shortcomings in my personality, I plan to change my writing process. It’s dangerous for someone like me to just write and hope it takes me to a logical place. ICE CREAM! I will need an outline to keep me on track. Common sense will save me from ending up in an entirely different story and writing ten times more material than I need.

What common sense advice speaks to you?

5. Incorporate the best advice

Save your manuscript under a new name and incorporate the common thread and common sense advice. If others, especially the professionals, agree that chapters, phrases, and words do not carry your story forward cut or change them.

You can go back to the original if you don’t like what you get. But I’m guessing you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

6. Test your manuscript

Revise, then test your manuscript with readers of the age group you are targeting. In extreme critique instances, ask your test group to select between the two different revisions and the original. If the pieces are too long, offer three different synopses for comparison.

My manuscript was originally written without a storm. The youngest member of my test group suggested one. Post-revision, the test group says the story is way cooler with a storm and it’s just the right amount of scary.

Trust your target audience. They’re the best indicator of the marketability of your story.

7. Start again (Back to Baby Peer Group, Mama Agent, and Papa Editor)

At the October 2013 Iowa SCBWI conference, a participant received a submission request from a major publishing house director. This friend started her manuscript over a decade ago.

“She’s arrived!” you say?

Not yet. She’ll follow the post-manuscript-review steps, then she’ll submit her manuscript.

I can’t wait to tell you how the story ends.

Blind Date Jitters

Dear AgentI feel like I just mailed a love note. And now I want to crawl into the post office box to get it back.

It’s that time of year again, the Society of Children’s Book Writers & Illustrators (SCBWI) conference season in the Midwest. Many of us children’s book writers and illustrators are frantically polishing treasured stories for a manuscript review. In return, we’ll receive feedback to improve our work.

Critique reviews also provide a prime networking opportunity. We try to bring our best to the table in an attempt to knock agents and editors–or experienced critiquers who know agents and editors–off of their feet. Usually, we’ve never met our manuscript reviewer before. We just know he/she hangs out on a pedestal.

The submission process feels awkward, like sending a love letter to a blind date in hopes of compatibility. It’s extremely humbling, yet stocked with hopeful anticipation and romantic notions of finding the one who will find extraordinary worth in us and our work.

Though some writers and illustrators may not admit it, our secret hope is that the agent or editor will say, “Where have you been? I’ve been looking for you all of my life. Will be my client? I must represent you and only you. Is this seven figure contract enough to seal our bond?”

Luckily I specialize in fiction.

I probably should look into fantasy.

Anyway, for all of you SCBWI Conference-wooers: Don’t lose your nerve! Step away from the post office box. You’re not a delusional stalker–really. (Okay, well some of us are.)

Incidentally, the Minnesota SCBWI Conference will be held October 12-13, followed by the Iowa SCBWI Conference, October 18-20. I’m cheering for some lucky agent/editor to find the one in you.

2012 Iowa SCBWI Conference-Heather Alexander

In my awkward unpublished stage, still unsure of my children’s book-writing ability, insecurity causes me to contrive misconceptions about agents, editors, publishers — all who seemingly hold my future in the palm of their hands —

  • that they will be stuffy.
  • that they own hard, plastic rulers to whap stupid writer’s knuckles.
  • that they have a secret society where they laugh together about writing endeavors that are off the mark.
  • that they are too busy to care.

Heather Alexander is as nice as she looks.

Heather Alexander, editor of Dial Books for Young Readers, a division of Penguin, dispelled my assumptions with a welcoming smile.  The thorough nature of my manuscript review indicated that she had not only read my manuscript, but she’d devoted plenty of thought and consideration into improving it.

She didn’t know it, but she verified everything  Linda Pratt (also not stuffy, ruler-bearing, etc.) had said the week before — even though they reviewed different manuscripts.  How could I not feel honored?  Two pros cared enough to honestly and constructively help me in my craft. Heather provided  confirmation that I had work to do — and she gave me additional tools to make my work work.

Ms. Alexander further dispelled the “too busy to care” misconception in the next day’s open mic sessions.  If you’ve never participated in one, a writer reads his/her manuscript for a set time.  During the reading the audience jots down comments and critiques.  When others read, I barely find the time to say, “Good job!”, “Loved that squirrel!” or  “You’d be good at voice-overs, too.”

But, among my critiques came a five-line note, signed by Heather, referring back to our review and reinforcing her advice.  She remembered.  That meant a lot to me.

Putting the ball in my court dispelled another misconception — that agents, editors, and publishers hold our future in the palms of their hands.

We hold our future.  They just help us carry it.

Thanks, Heather for the “hut, hut, hike.” It’s up to me to see how far I can run with the ball.