Earlier this year I entered the first 50 pages of a romantic suspense in a contest. I didn't win or place, but I was given a critique by others who write and read mysteries. I got that critique back over the weekend and thought I'd share it with you. Before I received the following critique, I tweaked, changed the title, did a little revision and submitted the first chapter and a synopsis to Love Inspired Suspense. You can read their rejection at the end of this post.
Hopefully, you can learn something from the judges comments as well as the rejection. Mainly, how interesting it is that several people can read the same thing and come away with vastly different opinions.
For those of you who have never entered your manuscripts in contests, this is pretty much what you receive. Sometimes less. Read it and weep, or get your first chapter ready for a contest. One way or another, they can lead you to publication.
_______
Please note that, even among publishing
professionals, preferences in style and content are subjective. These notes are
only suggestions and reflect the opinions of the judges. We hope you’ll find
them helpful.
Title: Death Makes it Right
Author: Jessica Ferguson
Because the judges were divided, a third
judge was asked to look at the manuscript.
Strong Beginning:
The first two judges were divided on the
opening.
The first said: “This feels so rushed that
I feel like it's a synopsis of a longer novel.
The first section, we're introduced to P.K., she threatens Sheridan,
yells at a reporter, beats the crap out of his son, and finds out Sheridan's
been murdered. This is five or six
chapter's worth, but it feels jammed into too tight a section. Give me more detail, setting, everything.”
The second said: Immediately hooked with sensory and character
details. Action begins immediately.
The third said: This is an interesting
setup, lots going on. It does seem a little rushed but is, overall, effective. It’s
not clear why both P.K. and Randolph are here, especially in light of the
receptionist’s immediate assumption that she’s a trucker. I think we need a
little more information so we can understand why they are both in the same place
at the same time. It seems intentional, but what does this have to do with her
being a trucker? Watch POV. For example, when PK pulls her hair back in the
opening scene, there are a few sentences about her flawless complexion and
haunted appearance. We’ve been in PK’s head until now, and this takes the
reader out of the story, since she can’t see herself (and even if she could,
it’s unlikely she would think of herself that way).
Character:
Judge 1: There's no time to get to know
P.K., so I have no idea whether I should believe that she's innocent or
guilty. The reader needs to get to know
your protagonist, have ideas about how she would react.
Judge 2: Excellent job of presenting the
characters: " "His dark, penetrating eyes never failed to disconcert
her. He had the air of a big, important man. He was quick, perceptive, and he
was waiting for her to acknowledge him." "His tick eyebrows were
clipped and when he brushed a large hand across his face, she noticed his
manicured nails." "Her hair was a frizzed bob, giving her a
wind-blown look, and her faded red blouse was belted loosely at the waist of
her khaki pants. She wore too much make-up, too much jewelry and reeked of
self-confidence."
Judge 3: Rudd and PK both seem like
interesting characters. I was more drawn to Rudd than to PK. He seems
well-intentioned and honorable, as well as likable. She has a bit of a chip on
her shoulder. Maybe understandable since her dad was just murdered, so I’d give
her the benefit of the doubt for a while longer. The reporter doesn’t seem very
well fleshed out. The story would be stronger if she were depicted in more
depth and complexity.
Setting:
Judge 1: Where is this set? Why is it
there? I get a sense of the hotel, but not the region, and as truck drivers,
geography would be paramount for these characters.
Judge 2: The sights and smells of New
Orleans come to life. "P.K. Everett wrinkled her nose as the fishy smell
assaulted her nostrils." Great sentence. "The convoluted mixture of
colognes and aftershaves mingled with the smell of crawfish." The picture
painted of his ransacked apartment was vivid.
Judge 3: There hasn’t been much opportunity
to experience the setting, other than the hotel. A few more strategically
place, specific sensory details would help create a stronger sense of place.
Also (not a criticism, just an observation), I associate New Orleans with good
food, whereas a “fishy” smell connotes anything but. Was that intentional?
Dialogue:
Judge 1: There was no difference between
the way P.K. spoke and the way Lori spoke. Characters can best show their
individuality through their dialogue, so take advantage of that and show their
distinct personality.
Judge 2: The scene where Rudd barged in on
P.J. and Lori was a good example of this authors command of dialogue.
Judge 3: The dialogue was generally good.
Could have been a bit crisper in places.
Plot:
Judge 1: I like the idea, but it was so
rushed that I didn't have time to appreciate any particular aspect. I'm guessing you have some passing familiarity
if not expertise with the trucking industry, so I would encourage you to
incorporate more of that into the plot.
As it is, it's fairly standard fare, and nothing about it really grabs
my attention.
Judge 2: Started fast and continued to
move. The scene where Rudd and PK embrace at the reporter's apartment seemed
contrived. Also, it was hard to imagine the protagonist allowing the reporter
to follow her into her hotel room. Other than that the plot flowed well and
worked.
Judge 3: An interesting premise. I’m
interested to learn who killed PK’s dad and Randolph, interested in what will
happen between Rudd and PK. (I can guess, but I’m still interested.)
Suspense/Tension:
Judge 1: Again, too rushed. There's no time for me to become apprehensive
about something before you bull onto the next section. Slow it down, let me wonder about things for
a bit.
Judge 2: Building suspense and creating
tension is one of this writer's strengths.
Judge 3: Tension/suspense were handled
well. In a few places, it might be heightened by slowing down a bit.
Conflicts:
Judge 1: Give us more background early on
about P.K. and why she's so angry. Her
conflicts with others are coming across as petty and childish, primarily
because we don't have any backing.
Judge 2: Plenty of conflict.
Judge 3: Plenty of conflict, which arises
naturally from the situation. Telling us a little more about the situation
would engage the reader more; we understand that she’s mad about her father’s
murder, but it would help to know why she thinks Randolph is behind it. There’s
plenty of information that can be legitimately withheld from the reader, but we
need some of this background in order to understand what’s happening.
Pacing:
Judge 1: The rushed quality is absolutely
burying the good aspects of this book.
Judge 2: For the most part the pace flows
well. It bogs down a little after they leave the reporters house on their way
to his apartment.
Judge 3: Generally good. A little rushed in
the beginning, a little slow with reporter. I’m sure she’ll play an important
role, but right now, it’s not clear what that is.
Voice/Writing style:
Judge 1: There's definitely a passion in
your writing about the topic. I believe
you genuinely are enthusiastic about the characters, and that shines through. You have a streamlined writing style very
similar to Elmore Leonard, and it's excellent.
Work on pacing and plot, and your style will carry you far.
Judge 2: The voice was sharp and crisp.
"His breath fanned her face." "His eyelids were tortured by
unshed tears." "The oppressive humidity was like a blanket covering
his face." Sometimes things were overstated: "He acted dazed."
The reader can see that.
Judge 3: The voice is good, fresh but not
intrusive.
Grammar & Mechanics: THIS IS HUMILIATING! I KNOW HOW TO SPELL!
Judge 1: Generally fine. It should be “All
right,” not “alright.” Also, watch your verb-noun agreement.
Judge 2: Some words are misused, but
probably editing oversights: grown for groan; on for own Directional words (up,
down, over, etc.), unneeded prepositions and words like "that" are
overused. Also used adverbs when not needed: nervously looked, A few missed punctuation marks (periods,
commas) but overall, ok.
Judge 3: Generally good. Needs another pass
for typos and tightening.
Additional Notes:
Judge 1: Rewrite this, and take your time
with each section. You have a strong
voice and good writing style, but that's being washed away with your rush to
get to the next scene.
Judge 2: Could be a contender.
Judge 3: No additional notes.
And here is a rejection I got on the same manuscript, revised BEFORE I got the above critique, and retitled:
_______
Dear Jessica,
Thank you for participating in the Love Inspired Suspense Fast Track and submitting BETRAYED, but I don’t feel like this project is right for LIS. While I think the idea of setting this story in the trucking world is interesting, your heroine came off as unlikeable. Our readers want a heroine they can relate too, and P.K. is much too combative. I’m sorry I don’t have better news for you. I recommend reading some of our books to get a better feel for the Love Inspired tone. We appreciate your submission and wish you the best of luck in your writing.
All the best,
Emily Brown
Editorial Assistant
Love Inspired Suspense