The Best of Seekerville From the Archives and First Five Pages Critique

Contest Judge Comments by Camy Tang


Camy here, your friendly neighborhood Genesis contest coordinator, talking about contest judge comments.

Now, I have to confess, I peek. I look at the comments of the judges as they return their entries to me.

In addition to being head coordinator, I’m category coordinating the Women’s Fiction category of the Genesis contest, so obviously I’m not looking at ALL the judged entries for ALL the categories, just my three categories.

But I’m not judging any entries in this contest (conflict of interest), so I figure it doesn’t hurt to look at the comments. And it helps me to evaluate if a judge tends to score high or low, or if they give lots of comments or only a few.

Here’s the facts—most judges in a contest are not habitually low or high scoring judges. Judge #A might happen to score Entry #1 lower than the other two judges who got that entry, but Judge #A will NOT typically score ALL her entries low—just that one entry will happen to be a low score.

In fact, the majority of judges are very temperate in their scoring. The maximum number of points is 100, with 60 being all 3s—average. Most judges might score one entry in the 90s and one entry in the 40s and the rest will range in between.

Before you gasp, think about it—it’s a bell curve. Only a few will have high scores and go on to the finals. Only a few are bare beginning writers. The rest fall in the largest area of the bell curve.

Granted, once in a while you’ll get that one judge who scores everything a 20, but also remember that once in a while you’ll get that one judge who scores everything 90 or higher and it might help propel you into the finals. And I’m certainly not going to complain about a high scoring judge when it benefits me. :)

Anyway, I was going to talk about judge comments.

Some judges have obviously taken at least an hour or more to score that 15-page entry, because they’ve got Track Changes comments and suggestions all over the place.

Some judges have a bare handful of comments.

As a coordinator, I kind of wish judges would write more comments, or longer comments, but as a writer, I also have realized that my own editors don’t wax poetic on a point.

They say something once, like “The heroine is not likable in the opening chapter.” And they expect me to fix it. They don’t tend to give me long paragraphs about WHY my heroine isn’t likable.

Here’s one thing all the Genesis judges have done (or should have done)—they filled out the Summary sheet on the scoresheet that lists five different areas of writing craft (Professional Impact, Story, Characterization, Conflict, Dialogue) and an overall Strengths/Weaknesses section. The judge comments in that Summary sheet are all typically rather useful.

What you have to do is realize that some judges say a LOT in very FEW WORDS.

It’ll be up to you, the entrant, to read carefully and figure out how to fix things.

“The story confused me in chapter two.” (Maybe too much going on, or too many characters, or inadequately explained motivations and actions)

“The dialogue was stilted.” (Maybe the entrant needs to have people read her dialogue so she can hear them herself.)

“I don’t know who the main character(s) are.” (Point of view might be muddled, or the main characters simply aren’t even in the first chapters, which could be a problem since most editors want to know who the book is about fairly quickly. There was the First Three Pages column in the March 2011 RWR that illustrated that point.)

“There’s no romance in the entry.” (The entrant entered the manuscript in the wrong category, or if the book really is a romance, they need to put some of that in the first 15 pages—this is typically a requirement of the romance genre.)

“Character was not sympathetic.” (This usually means there are several things in the first pages that make the reader not like the character—actions, or thoughts, or attitude, or inaccurately explained motivations. Here’s where crit partners instructed to look for where the character is unsympathetic can point out nuances.)

These comments are similar to what my editors have told me in their revision letters. When you enter a contest and get your entry back, realize that the comments can be very useful even if they’re not profuse.

Sometimes, you see the same comment on the same entry given by two different judges. That’s usually something to pay attention to. If Judge #A says she didn’t like your heroine, and Judge #B says he couldn’t relate to the heroine, that’s saying the same thing—make your heroine more sympathetic.

Some judges say completely disparate things—“great dialogue” and “stilted dialogue.” Well, it could be just personal preference—one liked your dialogue and one didn’t.

However, if another judge agrees and says you have “stilted dialogue,” then maybe it’s something to address.

Or if another judge says you have “great dialogue,” then just don’t stress about the “stilted dialogue” comment and just work on constantly improving your dialogue skills.

Camy Tang writes romance with a kick of wasabi. Out now is her romantic suspense, Formula for Danger. She runs the Story Sensei critique service, is a staff worker for her church youth group, and leads one of the worship teams for Sunday service. On her blog, she ponders frivolous things like knitting, running, dogs, and Asiana. Visit her website to sign up for her quarterly newsletter.

This post first appeared in Seekerville March 20, 2008.

Don't forget...

Today is the last day to be considered for our weekly critique.
More info here.

Contest Feedback Glossary

Missy Tippens here. I decided it would be fun to look back at comments I’ve had from contest judges, editors and agents and put them in some sort of glossary that might help other writers—especially those who may have never sent their work out into the world yet. So, without further ado, here are terms that I’ve seen over the years, along with MY interpretation of what they mean. Again, this is purely my speculation! And it’s in relation to my submissions.

“Cardboard characters.” I think what this means is that I didn’t go deep enough with the characters. I probably didn’t explore their backstory well enough before I started writing. Also, it may indicate they’re a little too stereotypical, or clichéd. Not different enough. And the way to make them different enough is to give them a past, to examine how it has affected them in the present, and to show how they will respond to the problems facing them in the present. Also, it may mean I didn’t let go with the emotion of the story. And I totally understand that. I’ve judged contest entries where everything felt superficial and boring. The characters didn’t seem invested in the story, and neither was I. So give your characters a past, and don’t hold back on emotion in your story.

“Didn’t sparkle.” Okay, this one kills me. Nearly broke my heart when I got the rejection that said this. And I still don’t know for sure what the comment meant. But I have a feeling it has something to do with the story being fresh, with a new twist on the same old plot. Or maybe the characters didn’t stand out. Or maybe the writing wasn’t rich enough. Oh well. I’m still at a loss on this one from so many years ago!

“What’s the point?” This one just cracked me up! I loved it. Because it’s wonderful to have someone tell you that. Seriously. Because then you know the moment you lost your reader—not a good thing! So it’s something that can be fixed. Obviously, the scene wasn’t working. It probably had no real purpose for being there. All scenes need a purpose! Preferably a couple of purposes. So if you’re writing something, and a reader can’t figure out the point, then there probably isn’t a legitimate one. Consider cutting it out.

“I suggest you buy such and such how-to book.” Okay, when more than one judge suggests a basic writing how-to book, then maybe it’s time to take an online writing class or to consider reviewing the basics. Now, just one judge saying this shouldn’t throw you. It may just be that judge’s standard judging procedure to suggest good books. But if you get this from several, it may be time to look into some beginning writer training or training on the particular topic mentioned.

“Too convenient a plot device.” Most likely, this means you’ve been lazy or careless. (Yes, I’m talking to myself here, too.) Did you forget to set something up that’s supposed to happen later? Of course, maybe some plot idea came to you later in the book—just appeared out of thin air. Well, cool! But then you have to go back and make sure it’s set up well and work it in so it makes perfect sense when it happens. You can’t have some coincidence solve all your hero’s problems. Or you can’t have some new character pop up in the book who shows the heroine the way she should go or who (even worse!) saves the day himself. No, don’t do something that’s going to make your reader go, “Oh, puleeeze!”

“Add more introspection.” This is a problem I've had recently. And if you've seen the comment, it could mean you're caught up in the moment (in the action or dialogue) and have forgotten to put in the character’s thoughts and feelings. Or maybe you're still basically on a first draft and haven't yet added the needed layering. Either way, you need the action, but you also need the reaction. What’s going on in the hero’s head as he’s talking? How does he feel? Does he really mean what he’s saying? Or is there different dialogue going on in his head (subtext) while he talks? The reader doesn’t want just a play by play. She wants to know how everyone feels about what’s going on! So give it to her. It’s a great way to work in backstory as well if it’s the appropriate time. Just remember, “A little dab’ll do ya.” Don’t have the character think for ten minutes straight! Work it into the action and dialogue in snippets (unless you’ve purposely worked in a time for reflection).

“So what?” This isn’t meant to be mean. This is an honest reaction to a point in the story that simply means, “I don’t care right now. Make me care.” It means your character may not be sympathetic enough. The reader isn’t invested. So look back at the beginning and try to make your characters lovable. And even if one isn’t really lovable yet, at least make the reader be pulling for him or her to grow and change. Think about the characters you remember most from your favorite books. What made you love that character? Was he funny and clever? Was she a victim and you hoped she found justice? Was he fun and flirty? Was she generous? Was he a powerful man but very lonely? Was he in danger but risked his life to help someone else? Look at heroic qualities and see if your characters have them. If not, fix it!

Well, I could probably think of a million more. But I hope this short list helps you look at contest judge/editor/agent feedback in a different light. So, what about you? What comments have you gotten, and what’s your take on what it means?

P.S. Who else here is old enough to remember where “A little dab’ll do ya” came from? :)

Missy--who's latest book, His Forever Love, is about to release on June 1!

Guest Blogger Carla Stewart on Characterization

Seekerville. What a lovely place to visit and greet old friends. Hang out with new ones. You girls thrill me with your cyber banquets and encouragement to one another. Congratulations on an excellent first year! I counted and think I met at least nine of you last month in Minneapolis, and you are just as much fun in person as you are here. Thanks for inviting me to share my thoughts.

This year I was fortunate enough to place first in the Young Adult category of the Genesis contest. You probably noticed a faint glow in the sky over the center of the U.S. following the conference. That was me, polishing the faux gold wreath on my plaque, sitting on a cloud, reveling in my accomplishment. Trust me. It didn’t last long. Before I got my suitcase unpacked from the conference, I received my scores from the finals’ judges. Whoops! Falling off the cloud is not nearly as much fun as getting up there. And that, my friends, is what entering contests is all about.

Fame is fragile . . . fleeting. But the judges’ scores are the gold mine . . . the nuggets that show me where my weaknesses lie and what I need to improve on. So now, I am heavily into revisions, taking my scores and seeing what I can do to improve my writing.

It had been awhile since I’d studied Donald Maass and his Writing the Breakout Novel. I had even purchased the workbook, but not cracked the spine, so I blew the dust off the cover and dug in. The first section is on character development, and the questions and exercises are worth noting. My apologies to the great Maass for summarizing here. You can learn much more from reading his theory and examples, but for today, I’ll just hit the high spots.

From the second chapter of the workbook, Multidimensional Characters:

1) What is your protagonist’s defining quality? What trait is most prominent in his personality?

This struck a chord with me because I had developed a character whose most prominent trait was self-centeredness. Not good if you want people to like your character.

2) What is the opposite of that quality?

After making some adjustments, I made my character one who takes responsibility seriously (more likeable). Now, the opposite of that is being irresponsible.

3) Write a paragraph in which your protagonist actively demonstrates the opposite quality.

Oh good. I could show my character being self-centered and irresponsible, but as an opposite trait that I want her to be loved for.

Note from the workbook: Often, after completing this exercise, writers will incorporate this paragraph into their novels. It shows that a character is multi-dimensional, more realistic, and more human.

Inner Conflict:

1) What does your protagonist most want?
2) What is the opposite of that?
3) How can your protagonist want BOTH of things simultaneously? What steps would she take to pursue these conflicting desires?

This was much more difficult for me to grasp, yet when I started working with it, I saw that in gaining what a character wants, she must concede other desires. For example, my character wants to find a hidden letter, but as she pursues this, she gets negative attention which reflects back on her as a responsible person. If she gives up her goal, she will no longer be in trouble, but must admit she failed. Showing both sides of her wants makes her a character that is memorable and lingers in the reader’s mind.

Creating larger-than-life qualities:

1) What is the one thing your protagonist would never, ever say?
2) What would she never, ever do?
3) What would she never, ever think?
4) Find places in your story in which your protagonist MUST say, do, and think those things? What are the circumstances? The consequences?

I had a lot of fun with this, but it also made me quite uncomfortable. I found, though, that this is the golden opportunity we have as writers to write those zingers we would never say in real life, but wish we could. Put your protagonist in the hot seat and see what happens (remember there are consequences).

Other chapters on character development take you through raising the stakes, handling character exposition, and developing antagonists that are worthy of their own story. For the essence of time, though, I want to share the last exercise that really helped me in honing my cast of characters. Since I write about small-town America, where people know everyone in town and all their family members as well as pets, I end up with too many characters. Here is a way to reduce your cast and enrich your story.

Combining Roles:

1) Make two columns. In the first, list the names of all major, secondary, and minor characters. In the second, write down the purpose for each character in the story (ex: support the protagonist, support the antagonist, provide special knowledge, etc.)
2) If you have ten or fewer characters, cross out the name of one. If more than ten, cross out the names of two. You get to decide which ones go.
3) You now have fewer characters, but their functions remain. Assign those functions to one or more of the remaining characters.

This makes the characters you are left with more interesting (multi-dimensional). I eliminated three from my current WIP and immediately saw a difference. I haven’t worked out all the details, but I’m having fun with it.

This should get you started on making memorable characters. To bring the point closer to home, my goal (want) in entering a contest is, of course, to win. I’ve put myself out there to be judged by others, and I cannot say enough in the way of thanks to other authors, agents, and editors who give of their time to judge contests. Their experience and opinions are invaluable. But if all I ever do is file the critique and not use it, I have missed the most critical part of entering a contest—using the information to point out the weaknesses in my writing and correcting them . . . even when the critique stings and the rewriting is hard work.

A study of Donald Maass’s book is the avenue I’ve chosen this time to examine and improve my writing. What about you? Do you have a favorite way to distill the information you receive from writing contests? What are your favorite ways to improve your writing?

Thanks again, Seekers, for having me here. You have a lovely island and I see some of the natives are preparing to launch to the mainland. God’s speed to all of you!


Carla Stewart writes women’s and young adult fiction. She lives in Tulsa, OK, where she can be found plotting writing strategies with her critique partner, Myra Johnson. You can learn more about Carla at www.carlastewart.com. She’d love for you all to visit her blog, Carla’s Writing Café.

Characterization and Contests

Every contest scoresheet is different. But one element you will almost always see judged is "Characterization."

I think it is the most important element to a story. Because no matter how great the plot....if people don't like your main character, they may not read far enough into the book to see what a plot-genius you are. LOL!

It is difficult to give a character struggles so they're real enough for readers to identify with, yet still keep them likable. Camy touched on that in a recent post. Characters should grow and change by the end of the book. But how much imperfection is too much? It's a hard balance to hit, so let's look at how contests gauge what makes characters great.

Some questions contest scoresheets ask are:

Are the main characters likable?

Identifiable?
Sympathetic?
Endearing?
Strong?
Multi-layered?
Three-Dimensional?
Memorable?
Relatable?
Heroic?
Lovable?

There are several other words that contest feedback forms use to describe strong characters...feel free to chime in if I hadn't included something you're familiar with.

What you don't want your main protag to be is flat, unlikable, cliche, unsympathetic, illogical and irritating to the point of provoking a book wall-banging, etc. There are a gazillion words for negative characterization traits.

I'm only gonna talk about some positive qualities characters need to have to hook readers. For instance, a character can be very memorable (think Freddie Kruger) but certainly not likable. But that's okay since he was the villain. LOL!

Since this is an interactive blog...I want mega feedback. Look at the bolded words above (by far an incomplete list). What on earth do these things mean? What do they mean TO YOU?

For me, a "memorable" character is one I think about days, weeks, months, even years after reading the book or watching the movie. A character who haunts me in the sense that I connected deeply with them. To the point I felt like they could be a real person. I WANT them to be a real person so I can know them. LOL! Characters who make me wish the world had a real person like them. Think Shindler of Shindler's List.

A character who recently moved me deeply was Ben Randall (played by Kevin Costner) in The Guardian.

The character of Ben was this brave (a "heroic" trait) rescuer, willing to risk his own life to save others ("endearing" and "memorable" traits). He also had this emotional struggle (which "added layers" and deepened him as a character) with his impending divorce and facing the fact that his skills may be slipping (two things that "sympathized" us to him) as a renowned record-breaking Coast Guard swimmer (again, a "heroic, larger than life" trait) and plunging him into possible retirement from a career that has become the bane of his existence.<-- (a trait that makes him seem "real" in the sense of he's this fabulous fantasy hero yet no one can escape the dreaded thing called aging. People (viewers/readers) can "relate" to that and "identify" with this character...especially those in that season of life where their bodies can't keep up with their careers.

Aspiring writers, since each of these terms are slightly different, how would you define them?

Readers...tell me what traits have endeared you to a character lately? Name a book or movie character who has stayed in your mind for years. Why do you think that is? How can we create characters that memorable in our books?

I'd love to hear more than "this character endeared me". What about that character drew and kept you? Or sympathized you to them? Was it the tragedy they suffered in childhood that came out in dialogue? What specifically did the author do to make that character memorable to you? What technique did they use to make you care enough about the fictional person to read the rest of the story?

Authors, we're dying to hear it! :-) What do you do to create strong characters?

This is an interactive blog...so talk away! :-) What you say (even you reader-only-readers) can help us writers strengthen our characters.

Ready, set, talk... :-)

Cheryl Wyatt