Getting the synopsis right

A good synopsis can be a major selling point when you submit work to a publisher. True, we probably won’t even read it if the writing’s no good. There is a slight irony in that; it’s always easier to fix bad writing than it is to mend that a story that isn’t working. Editors tend, anyway, to know more about editing than story-telling even if they can recognise a good story when they see one. So it may seem that under-par writing could be improved. Yes, most likely, but we just haven’t got the time to do it. The writing must go somewhere else to get fixed. So, it’s not even worth looking at the synopsis just yet.

Sadly, much writing passes muster and then is rejected because it seems from the synopsis that the writer just has no story to tell. Even more sadly it’s highly likely that they do have a good story but have failed to crystalize it well in the synopsis.

We ask a lot, we know. We usually want no more than 500 words and frequently less. It takes quite a lot of skill for the writer to represent their novel effectively in that space. And it is reassuring to us that the writers we decide to publish do have that skill.

So what should writers do?

Here a few things to avoid:

Writing the synopsis like a blurb

We do need to know the whole story and it needs to be told in a business-like manner. One or two rhetorical questions might be all right – particularly if they’re actually from the point of view of the protagonist – but if you don’t feel confident with this, don’t do it.

Writing in a quirky way

You might be writing a book that is quirky in style and you may wish to represent that style in your synopsis. It is great if you can pull it off. Most people don’t manage to and then it just becomes extremely irritating.

Creating a list

Avoid:” this happens and then this happens, then this happens and then that”. The commissioning editor needs to get a feel for where all of the drama and the tension is in the plot. Don’t overwhelm her with details.   

Getting the balance wrong

Don’t have too much of any of the following though you probably need some of each of these:

·         Backstory

·         Character description

·         Setting description

·         Action

·         Exposition

·         Justification (Yu actually shouldn’t need any of this in a well-written synopsis.)  

Writing in the past tense

Normally a synopsis should be written in the present tense. After all, the book remains the same each time it is read.  

Avoid overwriting

Keep your sentences succinct and to the point. Allow that word count work for you. Make sure your style is a tight as can be. You are using a completely different writing muscle here from the one you need to write your novel. No “The reason he is here is because….”

So, what should you do? Try this:

Recipe for a synopsis

1.      Define the novel in two or three lines. What type of novel is it? Which sub-genre? What happens to the main character?

2.      Say a little about the main characters and the setting, weaving in any backstory only if it is really important.

3.      Identify the main actions – usually no more than three or four - until you reach that all important crisis point.

4.      Describe the crisis point, perhaps giving it a paragraph all of its own.

5.      Define what happens in the car-chase moment – that gap between the crisis point and the resolution.

6.      Describe the new point of stasis that your protagonist has reached. Here you may hint at a follow-up story if appropriate.

And a hot tip. Read Nicola Morgan’s excellent book about writing synopses.     

Writers need never run out of ideas

There are thirty-nine dramatic plots, or twelve, or seven stories, or just one story shape according to which theory you follow. There are millions of themes. Writers can take a particular part of a known story and make it the whole story. They can clothe known characters in a variety of personalities. They can turn the stories they hear at the pub and the little articles in the local paper into major dramas. Never should a writer be able to say they are stuck for a story.

A new perspective on an old tale

Tell a well-known story from a different point of view. Perhaps tell the story of a footman or an ugly sister instead of Cinderella. Or bring the story right into the 21^st century. Perhaps Jack decides to try a GM crop much to the disgust of organic farmer mother.

Shakespeare is good for a story

The Bard has probably lasted not because of his elegant iambic pentameters and his use of the Warwickshire dialect but because he tells fine stories that resonate with humans. Tragedy, the bringing about of the hero’s downfall through his own unavoidable fault, is still valid. Impossible love affairs and mistaken identity still make for good reading material.

The Bible

This too is full of stories. They are quite intriguing – perhaps even more so if you don’t quite believe them. But it’s also quite a valid activity, finding out what really happened at the time. What would it have been like, being an Egyptian mother at the time when all first born were cursed? Or for that matter being a Jewish one who is tempted to hide her baby in the bulrushes? Who was that crazy teacher who gathered crowds to hear him talk? And what if it was happening now instead of then?

Down the pub

Can the gossip produce a story? Why exactly did the owner of the big hotel near the motorway roundabout run off with the Lottery money? What will happen now? What will happen to those families where the main earner has been made redundant? How is everyone going to get to the match on Saturday if it carries on snowing?  

Run over dogs

The small articles in the local newspaper. What about the little girl who lost her glove puppet three times in one week? Or the old lady living alone who took on the chance thief who broke into her home?  Not to mention the ATM that gave out £20 notes instead of £10.00.

If there’s a good story there we can normally fix the writing, time allowing i.e. if it’s not so dire that it would take too many man-hours to fix. Sadly no matter how great the writing we can’t take it if the story doesn’t work. Writers, there are so many sources of good stories.  Take the time to find yours.                     

One Publisher’s Selection Process

At the The Red Telephone we’re pretty conventional in what we ask for. We like three chapters, a synopsis, a bio and a blurb sent electronically. Electronic submission is becoming more and more common, so even that isn’t all that unusual.

Having said that, we do have a particular submission process. Please adhere to it. We’ll never reject an outstanding script because it was submitted wrongly but it if your script is border line and not submitted correctly and in the order we ask we’ll most likely reject.

If we tell you a little more about our selection process, you’ll perhaps understand. 

The blurb

We ask for this to be in the body of the email. This helps to determine whether we’re even going to look at the submission. If the blurb straight away warns us that this is a novel for nine-year-olds we won’t even bother opening the attachment. We publish novels for young adults.

We’re not too bothered at this stage about how good the blurb is as if we do accept your book we’ll probably supply this ourselves. However, if yours is exceptionally good we’ll use it and we’ll probably base ours on this one anyway.

First three chapters or 5,000 words

We like to see the first three chapters, as we want to know if the story engages. We  ask for three chapters or the first 5,000 words, whichever is the longest, as we want to see a substantial amount of writing. Can you write well and sustain the momentum? If we like what we see here, we’ll carry on and read the synopsis.

Two quite common problems stop us reading further.

·         The writing is poor and would take too many editor hours to put right. This usually comes from very new writers.  If we have time we’ll point out the biggest fault when we reject.

·         Often, even in chapters that are basically well written, the voice is wrong. When writing for young adults as opposed to about them, the narrative should be by a best mate, or just slightly older brother, cousin or aunt. First person works well here, though, so the text needs to sound like a friend who has had something amazing happen. Whether you love or hate Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series, she does have this voice right. I’m convinced too, that Bella had the first adventure then told us about it before she had the second.

The synopsis

If all is well, we’ll go ahead and read the synopsis. We want to know whether you actually have a story and whether it is convincing. Even better if it is something unusual or is something that has not been done before.

The three most common failures in story-telling are having a deus-ex-machina resolution where the hero has had no control over the good outcome, having a damp squib where the reader says “Was that it?” or having something totally over the top and melodramatic. The resolution is hard to get right and if it isn’t right it’s doubtful that even our most experienced editor could help. It’s actually easier to correct a badly written text even though lack of man-hours may forbid this. A failed story is a failure of the imagination and of creativity. We don’t have a magic wand to set that right.  

The bio

Even if we’re going to reject and have read the synopsis, we may well read the bio. We’re curious after all. If your text is border-line or you are dealing with a slightly tired theme, there may be something in your bio that persuades us to take the risk.  So do mention:

·         Other publications. This shows that other people have appreciated your writing and that you are familiar with the editorial process.

·         Prizes and awards. This again shows that other people have found your writing pleasing.

·         Higher education courses. This shows you are used to and can respond to rigorous criticism and that you have some knowledge of craft and canon.    

·         Experience of working with schools, libraries and festivals. This will convince us that you will be able to help us market the book.

·         Connections you have with the media. Again, this will help to persuade us how much you can help with publicity.

·         Use of social media. Point us to your twitter handle, your Facebook pages and profile and your web site. We can find out even more then and see what sort of presence you have.     

We’re going to judge your proposed book on its own merits, not on you. But all other things being equal, you may be able to provide us with some valuable information that could persuade us to issue a contract.

The outcomes

We aim to let you know we have your script within 48 hours and let you know the outcome within two months of the close of the submission period. If you’ve not heard within these limits, please get back to us. Our decisions will be one of the following:

·         Outright rejection, usually by email. We feel you’re not currently for us. That doesn’t stop you submitting other material in the future. Don’t be too disheartened. Everybody gets rejections. One more rejection is one step closer to being accepted.

·         We like it but … not for us at the moment. It may be too similar to something we’ve just done, not our style or your writing is a bit too raw yet. For this type of rejection we will probably write a very short critique; we do want to see you again in the future.  

·         The story is great. You write well. You’re a cool dude.  But eh, the voice is wrong. At this point we’ll ask you to rewrite the whole novel in a different voice. Gulp. Sorry, afraid so. We can’t risk liking a few chapters and offering a contract then having to wait months for the finished script. At least if you get this sort of note, we shall be prepared to read the whole novel. Even if we ultimately reject it, your novel will have improved a lot and may be acceptable to another publisher.

·         Everything is great – we like this, we like you, please send us the rest. A word of caution here. About 70% of whole scripts are still rejected. Maybe you didn’t keep up the standard of the writing, maybe the plot was a little unbalanced or, as often is the case, the first few pages shine then it goes downhill; you have obviously sent your story out several times. So, a little advice here. If you revise between submissions, revise the whole novel. Maybe we just weren’t excited about it enough in the end and we have to be excited or we won’t edit well or be able to market it.

If all of this seems a little negative, it isn’t meant to be. It’s just an attempt to be completely honest about what is involved.

And don’t be too discouraged. If you really want to do this you can.  It is a big IF, yes, but obstinacy is a virtue here.

Still want a go? Check out our submission guidelines here.

Why some people did not get into Bridge House's latest charity anthology

I've just finished selecting the stories for Bridge House Publishing's latest anthology, the one that will support the Children's Hospices. Some of the reasons are listed below.
There was really no story. This happens so often. I'd even query some I've seen in the New Yorker and in the Sunday Times colour supplement. Good writing has made some authors there get away with it. But you can't in an anthology for children. You have to have a story that works.
The plot was clichéd. Oh, dear, we’ve read this over and over....
The story was not for the junior school child – content or language was too old or too young. Only reading more and more of this material will help the author to get this exactly right. Some contact with junior school children would also be useful. Start offering author visits or do some voluntary work at your local school.
The story was too far-fetched. Back to the problems of story again. Only this time it’s the opposite problem. Some stories were just too melodramatic and not convincing.
There was too much telling and not enough showing. That old chestnut. But it is really important in short stories especially those written for children.
The story was too sad for this particular collection. We did stipulate that we wanted uplifting stories.
There was a roving viewpoint; this does not suit stories as short as these. This is also a very common problem amongst inexperienced writers.
We couldn’t give individual feedback but at least we let people know the points above. And now we’re letting the wider world know.
Happy writing, everyone.