One of the biggest problems a new writer encounters is how to weave in back story so it does not ruin the continuity of the current story. Writers that continue classic lit have a major problem. Not only do we need to weave in the back story of our characters, but the story of the original book as well.

What is back story? It is everything that happened before your story begins that has a potential impact on your characters and their journey. If it doesn't impact that journey-leave it out!

You only need the minimum amount to keep the reader engaged and to unfold your story arch. Everything else is just filler you as the writer might use to build your character and their world but the reader doesn't need to know. The reader only needs the essentials.

You will need to choose when it is crucial for a reader to know a tid-bit of back story. Chose the right moment and use that bit of information to move the story forward into a new direction. Always make it relevant to the current situation.

This can be achieved a few ways:

Short spots of narrative where there author sets the stage can be use in introductory section. This method is often in omniscient point of view and if overused can be author intrusive. Keep it to one paragraph at most or better a few sentences.

Flashbacks must be kept tight, as they pause the current action. They can provide an emotional tug to the story and add a great deal of impact if done correctly. You should swap between present and past tense ending on a strong note. Use triggers to lead the character into the flashback. Indicate them in your text with italics. Avoid them in the beginning of a book-try not to put them in the first three chapters and always us them when they follow a strong scene. Remember, flashbacks are like telling a secondary story. Don't let them over take your plot.

Introspection and deductive introspection can be a great way for one character to observe and figure out the history of another.

Dialogue can be used. You can have sections of your book with parties gossiping, overhearing, or debating elements that can be converted to back story.

The way a character reacts to a certain stimulus can imply back story. For instance my heroine is afraid of dogs. This leads into a major clue as to her history which unfolds only a little bit in the first book, and more so in the second. Her history simply as not needed in detail in book one. How a third party sees her react can further expand on this element.

Physical description is very effective. I use this in Madrigal as Erik's deformities are a major clue as to his back story. Crafting a character whose facial expressions are hidden behind a mask is no easy task. I rely on attitude, posture, voice inflection etc to express elements of his personality and history. Environment further adds to this. A reader might wonder what happened in his past to cause him to live underground in a house with his mother's furniture yet he sleeps in a coffin…

Back story should answer a major need for the reader to know that information at that point in the plot. Include what you need to keep the reader questioning and engaged, and back story will help you craft a page turner that keeps your readers wanting more.

How do your friends describe you? What is your character? Characterization goes beyond the physical attributes. Characterization is more than telling a reader: Anna has auburn hair and blue eyes or Krock is vampire. It is getting your reader to in some way identify with your hero and heroine. More often than not in real life a person who seems charismatic to one is a real bore to the next. So with your fiction writing you have to see your characters in a melting pot sort of way. If universally you are being told there is something wrong with a character (opposite a flaw, which you need) then you have to look to your characterization.

A huge mistake: The Mary Sue. Yes, we all put some form of ourselves into our characters, but if we focus too much on one element it is going to be obvious that we are creating a fictional realm that will only appeal to the writer and not the reader.

A second mistake is only focusing on one part of a character… making his or her heroic abilities or's sex drive shine above everything else and ignoring other elements that would round them out. Why do you think writers have a hard time writing one character over the next? In real life you don't just focus immediately on one element of a person do you? Do you come right out to someone you just met and say: hey nice to meet you, but I really think you need to focus more on your interpersonal skills? No. You wait a bit… see how you react to that person and see how that person reacts to certain situations before you get intimate. It is the same with connecting a reader to a character. Put your character in different situation and you will engage the reader to look more closely. Something that makes a character fail is a character that is totally made up and does not pull from your real life experiences.

When you figure out your character and where you want to go with s/he then it is time to get them to act the right way by giving them emotions. Lose the clichés. Editors and agents look for this. Clichés like: rolling eyes, hearts on sleeve, butterflies in the stomach. Find fresh metaphors to use because editors have heard them all. Do this by finding physiological reaction to the emotions. What is causing the anger, fear, joy etc? Likewise, show it on your character… "Shock cracked the fine porcelain of her skin…." See? Did that give you an image? Instead of saying "her eyes were wide as saucers," which is a common way to describe shock or amazement, I created a fresh metaphor that lets you know something is shocking and describes the character in some way. It is easy to do a global search of your manuscript for phrases like this and then edit them out. These little emotions can then become character traits. For example the way a character "plows his hand through his hair" can be a nervous habit that will instantly alert a reader to the tone of a scene.

Next, names. Make sure they are appropriate to your type of story and time period. Please, no Sky's or Sequoia's in 19th century France! Only name those characters that will be vital to the story. Why would you name a shopkeeper only seen in the first three paragraphs of your story? Am I to be looking for that character later on? Is s/he that important? The names you choose should match your character in some way as well. Think beyond hair and eye color to movement, do the amble and lumber or are they lithe and agile? Do the smell of lily of the valleys or of rotting meat? Pull in all the senses for your reader.

Likewise, how do they speak? Chose a sound for your character and stick with it. There is a divide among historical writers (and agents as well) Some editors and agents like contractions regardless of time period. Why? Because it is how the contemporary reader speaks and writes. Chose what route you are going to take and sick with it. I do not use them when I am writing in the voice of my noblemen (and obviously I am used to not typing them). I do use them for second class citizens. I have yet to be slapped on the wrist for this…

Regardless, whatever tone you choose for a character make sure it is unique so that in long strings of dialogue a reader knows who is speaking without using tags all the time. But, contrariwise, be careful in writing accents. Readers are not stupid; if you tell them someone is a southern-bell with a heavy accent they will create the tone of that character's voice in their mind. Avoid writing long strings of dialogue in any particular accent; it gets cumbersome and difficult to read. You can do so to add flavor here and there and if you use foreign languages at all in your text to add to a character make sure you translate that sentence immediately.

Sex: huge part of characterization believe it or not. If it is in your novel it is a great way to get a reader to connect to how your character behaves and reacts. How they think about sex, move during sex, and seduce are great character keys. Do they think only of their desires or those of their partner? Are they greedy or slow? Rough or gentle? Does your character make love the same way all the time? Think how sex reveals you character to the audience. Are they a romantic and sensual? Is it just a quickie to get the job done? Does it distress your character if s/he is a victim of a violent crime? Even details such as sex can show part of characterization. You cannot make sex the same time and time again… nor can you make a character and unflawed sex god. If the sex in your novel is too beautiful and perfect every time no one is going to believe it. If your characters have flaws, and they better have them, then sex should have its little idiosyncrasies as well. The characterization of your character permeates every part of your book.

The goal with good characterization is to establish a solid foundation and voice for your character. You want a reader to be able to put down your book, pick it up at a random page and, through your narration and actions of that character, know right off the bat whether they should grab some popcorn or pour some cognac…

Conflict: the stumbling block of your story. Conflict is the primary reason your characters cannot have what s/he wants when s/her wants it. Conflict is what makes the character stumble and the reader worry. Commercial fiction must have conflict--if there is nothing pushing and pulling against your characters to achieve their goals and challenge their motivation… well… what the hell are you writing?

It is very easy to overwhelm a reader with too much conflict. Too many twist and turns to one character and they will be totally lost in the storyline. Conflict will move your story forward and keep the pace of it consistent. Nothing kills a full manuscript request faster then the "sagging middle" Those stories that have great hooks, good endings but are all over the place in order to get there. You cannot have your characters wander around in your manuscript looking for conflict as if trying to find out the basis for their reasons for being in the story. Misunderstanding and circumstantial situations are not conflict!

Conflict has two elements: internal and external just like motivation does. And, like motivation, internal will be your emotional link. So… going back to Anna: Her desire is rise above her current situation because she wants to overcome her flaws and not be judged by her past is but coming out of hiding means possibly going to prison. Did you catch that but? Like the "because" in the motivator, the "but" is the link to your conflict. For Anna the "but" lies in the two noble families hunting her down who want her in prison. Trying to embrace the society she wishes to live in means her past may be exposed and her life put in jeopardy.

Internal conflict is emotional and adds meaning to your external conflict: leaving the underground means having to chose between attempting a normal life or remaining a criminal so she can stay with the man she loves. Push and Pull. So the conflict here comes down to a matter of choice. Sometimes cliché phrases can be used to help you organize your thoughts: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't. If Anna reaches for her goal of being "normal" and living a "normal" life she will lose the love of a man she has fought so desperately to reach.

You have to lay down conflict slowly and gradually build it up in your story through action and events. The goal with conflict is to make your reader worry that the character will never achieve their goal. I have only outlined the basic GMC's for my heroine. Each character has a GMC. By the time you get to creating conflict, your ultimate goal should be to have your characters collide… which will create your climax and black moment in your story.

Keep in mind that each and every scene in your manuscript should in some way forward a GMC of a character. If not, learn to love your double-strike through key and good old Mr. Delete. Characters can have multiple conflicts working against them and different conflicts in each book (if you are writing a series.) If you are writing a consecutive series you do not need to have that big clash of conflict that resolves everything with a clear cut winner and loser. I think in each of my manuscripts the characters achieve at least one element of their GMC in each book-but none are redeemed (one of my themes) until the end. So I create conflict, but I do not resolve the goal. This is ok if it is a trilogy… if you write single title or series with different plots; you have to let the reader off the hook.

What is deep point of view (POV)? It is a closed third person combination of the omniscient point of view driven on by character experiences and emotions. You see the entire scene through one character's eyes and never leave his or her thoughts. Sounds like normal POV, doesn't it? Its not.

In deep POV, attitude is shown--not memory of actions or thoughts like regular POV. It is a deep internalization of your characters thoughts at the time and a way to heat up your writing to move it forward. But over do it and a reader will just want to get the hell out of that character's head.

An easy way to do deep POV is just by searching you manuscript for the basics. Check your dialogue, tone, language, facial expressions and inner responses to see if they are reacting to what is being told.

Remove s/he thought, watched, saw etc. Those distance the reader from the story and the POV.

Always describe in voice of your character. My heroine not going to react to my hero murdering someone by exclaiming gracious heavens-- bloody hell is more like it. In deep POV thoughts and actions have to be natural to a character.

One thing to do with deep POV is to break all the rules. What are the rules? The usual suspects: always name your characters and describe them for the reader. Explain who is who right off the bat. Get your character to meet in the first five pages…

Nope. Break it. With deep POV naming everything will only annoy the reader. Next rule to break, lose the tags, they will pull a reader out of the story. Deep POV involves using signature actions to identify characters using only one person's thoughts but never saying he thought.

We as writers want to label everything, but it is not necessary. In a scene with only two characters, establish who is who in the beginning and lose the need to say "he said", "she said", "Anna did this" If the reader knows the characters well enough-by your use of deep POV with them early on-they will understand their voice and actions enough to not need the rule book.

Desire, ambition, need, want-those are goals.

Don't know them for your character? Welcome to the slush pile! You know-those stacks in the big trade houses that stand waist high? (I kid you not on that.) The slush pile is those query letters and snippets of writing that get tossed aside to be read more closely-eventually--after the knee high stack of requested manuscripts.

Every scene in your ms must have a goal. It must move the desire of your character forward if not, why the hell is it there? A goal is the character's purpose-and a good one must be immediate. We are not talking the man who simply wants to find true love or the vampire that wants to reform… we mean characters that want what they want because if they don't get it-things will get ugly… and fast! Immediacy-it is important in a goal for a good character, without it, they are lame ducks.

For example I could sa' this for my heroine's GMC: Anna wants nothing more than to overcome her faults and flee the "underground" of society to start a new life. Yeah? She does? Well, snoozeville… let's see how fast this manuscript soars into the slush pile.

The goal of being accepted must be urgent if she wants it so badly. It comes down to the question of "Why should I care?" But if I say: Anna must overcome her flaws now and escape the underground society of France, because she is the partner of the most notorious con artist in Europe. She duped him and now he is looking for her and wants revenge. Problem is she can't leave the underground because that means losing the love she finally found… and the man she loves will never be accepted in the world she desires… and by the way… her partner is her father and her father linked to the man she loves….oh… just can open… worms everywhere….

The goal of seeking normalcy and rising out of the social underground adds tension in my story. It creates a push and pull against the goals of my other characters. And every character--unless they are someone seen only once--should have a goal. Every. Character. They must interact and their goals must drive them the end result.

Whatever your goal, make certain you identify it within the first pages that you introduce your character. Your reader must identify with that character from the start and you must prove what is at stake in that character's life. The first three chapters make or break a career for a writer when you are seeking agents and editors. Make sure your reader empathize with their goal… understand why they want it (motivator) and then fill them with worry (conflict)

You do not always have to achieve the goals, especially if you are writing a series. You just need to show the reader the way to the next story through the conflict. My characters do not achieve their goals in my fist manuscript, but I set it up in such a way that they are kicking and screaming to reach them until the very end. Each character achieves a partial goal in each book. This will keep the reader reading.

And that is what we want…

"It was the best of times; it was the worst of times…"

"Last night I dreamt I went to Manderly again…"

"Call me Ishmael."

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of good fortune must be in want of a wife."

Hooks, they are the reader's first invitation into your imagination. Your first sentence is your calling card. Make it worthwhile! It is not just the first line that should hook a reader. The hook sets the tone for the next sentence, the next sentence the paragraph, the paragraph your chapter and so on.

The tone you have in your hook makes it or breaks it for a reader. You absolutely must hook a reader (and agents) in your opening pages (usually the first five-ten). A common mistake with new writers is that there is a great hook--but the rest falls apart. We call this the sagging middle.

While the beginning of your book is important to capture a reader's attention you must follow through with equal attention for all parts of your book. Black moments (that part where all hope seems lost) usually come toward the end of the book and readers will remember them. But why bother if the journey to get from the beginning to the end is lost? Pay attention to all parts of your story. A book might have a great first chapter, but if all else is bland, with characters just being pushed around with no direction, no one is going to care. Likewise, no reader is going to buy your next book just because you are good at beginning and endings. The meat of your story is in the middle.

So how do you get there? How do you grab a reader's attention? Hooks do not need to be intense or quirky; they just need to set the tone for your book. That tone must be consistent throughout your novel, so put thought into what your write. Is your book going to be edgy and dark or a light hearted chick lit? Do you write erotica so sex is a primary focus? I chose the four opening hooks above because each sets a specific tone for the books they come from. Right off the bat we know Dicken's A Tale of Two Cities is not going to be an upbeat story. du Maurier's Rebecca hooks me by making me wonder: What is Manderly and why was she dreaming about it? And I know Austen's first line is not going to be chick lit… What ever your hook, make the following sentence match it.

Here, the second line of Rebecca:

"Last night I dreamt I went to Manderly again. It seemed to me I stood by the iron gate leading to the drive, and for a while I could not enter for the way was barred to me."

What if she said this:

"Last night I dreamt I went to Manderly again. There was an iron gate in my way."

Can you see how that does not match the tone of the hook?

A hook's best friend is its grabber. Those are the lines at the end of a chapter that makes your reader want to turn the page. Most readers stop reading at the end of a chapter and you have to make them come back to pick up your book. Make sure your close a paragraph, page or chapter with imagery that will make the reader want to move on. End on a cliff hanger, ask a question, and use good imagery. A strong grabber or closing hook propels the reader into the next chapter or resonates with him enough to make him want to return. "It is no ordinary skeleton." Granted… there is no chapter to read after that, but who can argue the powerful imagery? Even if you flipped to the last page of that book, wouldn't you want to know the beginning? (But remember-avoid the sagging middle)

Lesson here: you spent months, or if you are like me years, on your manuscript. Don't waste that by a weak hook or empty grabbers that do not match your book.

Motivation: what drives your character to his or her goal? Fiction is limitless. We can create anything we want, but if what we create is so far out in left field readers will be wondering why they are reading such bunk. You have to be able to answer the question of why in your manuscript. Why does your character do what s/he does? The motivation is what makes a reader believe in your character and cheer them on to the goal.

Why's can be simple with complex layers. Anna wants to overcome her faults, clear her name and start a new life because (and the word because is key in building GMC's)… she haunted by remorse for being a murderer. Well ain't that a spit on your neck fantastic fault to have to overcome? She has to rise above this fault and do so now because her father is looking for her to commit additional crimes. How does she overcome this fault? Not telling… but if you successfully motivate a character by pushing them to the wall and make them react to the need to achieve their goals, a reader will follow you blindly into any and all situations.

Now… internal/external motivators are where character building gets complex. The external motivator for Anna is the unhappy life she leads and the people she associates herself with: the underground of society, the shantytowns, the brothels, the catacombs. By living in these areas she is associating herself with the very life she wishes to leave behind. Why would a young woman want to live there? Especially during a time period when most wish the middle class life? Internal motivator: redemption, remorse, guilt, a desire not to be judged by situations she was forced to do--independence from her past--the choice between freedom and clearing her name... This gets into my underlying theme of redemption and prejudice in my manuscripts. In your motivators you will see your themes born. The internal motivation is what will create the emotional responses your character will have to achieving their goals. Emotional scars are great motivators.

Your motivation has to be urgent and unique to your character. Believability… it plays out in your motivation too.

Pacing… it is probably the hardest element in your story for a writer to self-edit. We get so absorbed in our worlds and our characters that we can't see if the story is flowing in the right direction.

Pacing is another was to ask yourself if your story reads. Is it dull? Sagging? Fast? Slow? What does it need to improve? Pacing is something a writer usually edits last. It is the one element that permeates every part of your story. Hooks deal with the beginning, black moments are your climax, characterization feed your readers-but pacing… is your book.

In genre fiction the pacing is different book to book. Those writing literary fiction or a historicals can afford a slower pace. Mysteries, thrillers and suspense should be faster, but in romance fiction your pace cannot be at the expense of character development. So first order of business: What is your genre? Does it have all the correct elements to officially be classified erotica? Is it plot driven or character driven? Is it a historical with the correct elements to make is so?

In order to look at pacing the right way, if you are at that point in you manuscript, is to do this: BACK AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD. Leave. It. Alone. At least for a few days better yet, weeks.This way you can come at it fresh.

If you think your story is dragging, ask yourself this question: Why? Is it boring to other readers because it is so interesting to you? Do you have the dreaded sagging middle? Is your opening hook great and your ending stellar but you dropped the plot in the rush to get there? If your work is slow maybe you don't have enough conflict pushing your characters to react.

Do you show verses tell? This is a major component of writing. Nothing will bore a reader more than being narrated at for 350 pages. Drama will increase the pace.

What if your book is flying by in a whorl of black and white? What might cause that? Not enough action? Books that are just strings of dialogue with no easy and logical beats are hard to read. Dialogue really pushes the story forward. Readers look to dialogue to get into the meat of a scene. If you have pages and pages of narration then several of dialogue, maybe you are not balancing the two correctly.

Bottom line: conflict drives your pace. This goes back to GMC. Not enough conflict, your pacing will be off and you have to go back and look at your characters to fix it.

Some tips to:

• Start your book off with a bang. Get a good hook, or start it in a dramatic scene. This will push a reader forward. Hooks are important. Do not ignore them!

• Keep chapters and scenes fairly short, but there are no written rules so don't sweat it. Mine tend to be between 7-10K words.

• Avoid back story in the first chapter. Weave it in slowly. Back story is literary death if you dump it on a reader.

• For those of you writing series-first books can be longer… shorten book two and three.

• Just like you hook them in the beginning, keep them on the hook at the end of each chapter. We call this the reader grabbers or ending hooks. Use cliffhangers… make them want to go the next scene, end with drama.

• If you have a lot action in a scene, use short sentences. Chop it up. Move the action forward.

• Cut the unnecessary adjectives and adverbs.

• Show, don't tell… you can tell more in your sequels.

• Use dialogue-readers look for this, even flip to those sections. They don't like long narrative passages.

…get your work out there and under the nose of an agent. They will lay it on the line for you in the frankest of terms…

This:

He stood in the doorway watching her undress. She was a beautiful woman and a complete puzzle to him. There was no doubt he wanted her, the question was how to make her his. Her long hair brushed her back and he found he could resist her allure no longer. Entering the room, he undid the buttons on his vest and loosened his cravat. He took the unraveled bow in his hands and, with a devilish gleam to his eyes; he called her name and asked for her hands.

Or this:

He leaned against the doorframe, one long leg bent against the wall, casually indulging in his voyeurism. As he watched her, an ache coiled across his midsection until it centered lower on his tightening breeches. Klaus shifted uncomfortably and rubbed a hand across the ripple on his brow. Confounded woman. Must she be such an enigma?

Two small hands gripped her dress on either side of her waist. With one artful swish of her arms, she lifted the muslin over her head and dropped it to the floor.

Mein Gott…

Her skin--flawless like freshly fired porcelain-provided a perfect the backdrop for her hair. Curls rippled down her back in a river of gold.

Unable to resist, he pushed off from the doorframe. He shucked his waistcoat and tossed it the floor. Ignoring the slap it made as metals clanked against flagstone, he kept his gaze locked on her. Three twists of a finger and his had his vest undone. Unraveling his silk cravat, he freed his neck with one harsh jerk. His fingers worked the buttons of his collar as he called her name.

She turned.

Klaus dragged the length of the silk through his fingers. "Come. Give me your hands…"

Which seemed better? Hopefully version two…

What was the difference? The first was a narration of facts with nothing too specific. The second showed the action to the reader with prose in an immediate scene.

Writers tend to want to tell everything to a reader. We want to share all the details we find so fascinating with our audience. But who wants to be spoon fed a story? Keep telling everything and you end up a dictionary of facts, not a story. Writers should show a reader what their characters are like through action. You want to leave some elements in your story to the imagination, but nudge the reader gently in the direction you want them to go. The main goal with showing is to have the reader draw his or her own conclusion about your characters instead of being told: She was a beautiful woman.

Permit the reader to figure out just how beautiful by their reactions to your character's reaction. To do this I used Klaus's reaction and deep POV, and described her in more ways than just the bare facts. For example I could have just said: She had long, curly blonde hair instead of Curls rippled down her back in a river of gold. Granted, these are facts about the characters/setting. But stating them in such a way is different from telling the reader what conclusion s/he is to draw.

Here is another example. If you bog down your writing by just stating the bare bones facts your work will read like a synopsis. It will have no specific sense of setting or characters.

He had not been home in years. The chateau was very old. It was respected. It was a blustery and sad day for him to return. (You asleep yet?)

By writing this way, a reader feels like they have just read an outline of the story. They know what is supposed to happen, but have no sense of immediacy. They are not immersed in it. You must engage the reader and invite them to enter your world.

If you change a narrative passage like the one above and make it into a scene by showing more of your style and "world" the work will sound better. Now, here is a downfall. Where you had four sentences, you may now end up with a full page or more of text in order to get your point across. But it will be a lot less tedious to a reader because showing action tends to make a story read faster… even though there is more of it. Mix it around by changing the economy of words. Provide more than just what the reader needs to see… add other senses into the description. Here is the same scene:

It had been years since he set foot on Chagny ground. Since severing his ties, Raoul roamed freely through his viscounties, but had never returned to his birthplace. Chagn-- stoic and ancient--stood through the centuries and the years without him. The ivy covering the walls sheltered secrets as ardently as it embraced the love, compassion and outreach of its namesake.

It rose like an awesome presence in the region it commanded, its flags displaying the family colors snapping proudly in the breeze. Nevertheless, now Chagny stood cocooned in grief, the ivy on the walls the only fingers catching the tears of France as a noble son was mourned….

To find areas in your manuscript where you should show vs. tell is easy. Look for places where you seem to describe a lot of detail, where you introduce a new character, a transition involving time, or anywhere your manuscript seems to be moving slow. Take those passages and turn them into scenes… make your character's interact. Back story is a huge culprit. Most of the time back story issues can be resolved by turning all the dull narration about what happened before your story takes place by making it occur as a scene or by scattering throughout your manuscript. Naturally your entire manuscript should not be strings of dialogue and scenes-it would be over before it began. You have to give your reader time to digest and that is where it is ok to tell more (narrate) to the reader.

Once you know what passages you need to change, try to find the most important fact and dramatize that one element. Which part of the scene is most important to your book? In the above passage the strongest sentence should be the last: Nevertheless, now Chagny stood cocooned in grief, the ivy on the walls the only fingers catching the tears of France as a noble son was mourned… It is the most powerful of the scene and leads into the action of what happened next. It captures the tone for the chapter.

You should try to replace information in your scenes with actions or events that show the same purpose. From the same chapter as the above I could have said this:

Raoul was numbed by the events. The responsibility facing him was oppressive and heavy. He had far too many thoughts running through his mind to take pause to deal with any of them and worst of all-he could not push the memories from his mind.

But I went with this:

Raoul walked with unfeeling steps through the halls of this childhood home. One hand clutched the sword upon his hip, the only feeling in his soul the sensation of blood rushing from his knuckles. Every time he closed his eyes he saw his brother's flag-draped casket. He recalled the sea of black clad mourners staring at him. Raoul heard the sobs and cries of grief. He felt the profound pain in his chest that called for him to draw his sword and end the misery…

And yet, he could not cry.

Alone, Raoul entered the library and drew the doors closed behind him. He shed his belt. The sword clanged to the floor. Picking it up, he tossed it on the divan, peeled off his gloves and loosened the buttons of his tunic. Moving mechanically toward the desk, he sat. Raoul gently rubbed his hands across the worn mahogany, following the darkened areas of wood where his brother's hands had done the exact thing year after year. He closed his eyes, chasing away the image of the box that was now his brother, as his mind filled with memories…

The lesson here: replace dry prose with that which will engage a reader. Short sentences when action is involved move a scene forward. One thing to do with showing is to leave something to be desired. Let the reader into your mind, but allow them to draw their own conclusion. I don't tell the reader why Raoul cannot cry--odd thing for a man who just lost the brother he adored--I let the reader stew on that so they can determine what emotion, thought or memory is causing him to feel this way.

In looking to settings, many writers "tell". It is far easier to say: the labyrinth was dark. Instead of saying: The torches did not provide enough light for even the keenest eye to see.

In conversation between characters, show the action, avoid telling the reader what is going on. In the following scene I could have written after the line " you always seem perched on the edge of some sort of thought or emotion." She turned back to her stitching.

Erik was infuriated.

But where is the showing in that?

"You should be afraid," he whispered into the glass.

"Of you?" Her head snapped back as if slapped. Had his statement surprised her? "Surely, you've had too much to drink! Erik, you may be peculiar, even eccentric, but I rather enjoy that about you. You always seemed perched on the edge of some sort of thought or emotion." She turned back to her stitching.

Erik stood abruptly, knocking his chair aside with a violent thrust. He threw the wine glass against a far wall. The shattering glass echoed like an explosion, raining bits of crystal and wine in every direction. The wall bled red. He flew into a blind fury, perched on the edge of something indeed.

"Yes!" he shouted a dangerous undercurrent in his clipped tones. "You should be afraid yet you do not run! You keep coming back! You know nothing of me. Why, Anna? Why do you keep returning? Why do you not run?"

Bottom line, a writer has to go through their story and pick and choose what parts they feel will best be enhanced by showing. It is a tedious process but will enhance your storyline and hopefully land you book on the right editor's desk.

Congrats. You've written a query letter that sells and the agent has requested the partial. You have not fallen on your arse doing the yippity skippity dance, so now what?

Abject horror… that's what. Oh. Dear. Lord. They are going to read it…

But you are cool… you made certain your book has the correct sound. You understand your writing may look great and you may understand it, but the reader is not in your head. My critique partner is great at telling me when my manuscript does not sound right. My sentence structure may be correct, but the rhythm of the sentence just is horrid.

What causes a sentence to sound wrong? Grammatical mistakes are one big element. Get a copy of Strunk and White and wear it out. Learn when to use a period, comma, colon and semicolon. Know the difference between the hyphen and dash.

Alliteration is great in poetry but not in writing. Alliteration is the repetition of the first letter of a word in the word that follows it. For example: long look, broad boulevard, winter in a wonderland. They can really bog down the pace of a story.

Watch how often you use your character's name verses "he" and "she". Mix it up. Using one over the other too many times will change the sound of your manuscript. It is also great you use you thesaurus, but don't overdo it with odd sounding and unusual words. Readers will remember them, same with favored clichés. I read a book that was filled with mistakes like this. If I read one more sentence about the hero's raven locks, or rainbow tears I was going to kill myself.

You should pay attention to the consistency within your paragraphs as well. Mix up your paragraphs with a blend of long and short sentences. This gives the reader a break and helps to balance the sound of your writing.

How do you fix problems with sound? Read you manuscript out loud. You will easily find the places where your tongue is tripping (and yes I did that alliteration on purpose).

Don't complicate your manuscript! Keep it simple. Avoid long strings of flowery prose and complex sentence structures. You can say a lot with a few well chosen words.

Hand in hand with sound is the tone of your book. Tone is the voice you are putting into your manuscript. Are you witty? Poetic? Sarcastic? Flavor your writing with bits of your tone, but don't overdo it. I get cynical in my trilogy here and there. My hero is a bit jaded, so I bring out this tone usually when he is one step away from the madhouse. If I made him cynical all the time it would overpower the flow of the story. Sometimes you want your tone to contrast a scene and you can adjust for that in your manuscript. Mostly however you want your tone to spice up your writing. I find tone develops over time.

Imagine your character is sitting across from you telling you his life story. From that you can find the tone of your book. After all, your book is about the characters and their story, not you as writer. The voices in your head are hiring you to get their story out. They will pay you back later with a six figure royalty advance.

Lower those eyebrows… it could happen.