Showing posts with label Woman's World. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Woman's World. Show all posts

18 August 2012

A Woman's World Survival Guide




by John M. Floyd

Two weeks ago my friend R.T. Lawton posted a column here about writing mini-mysteries for Woman's World Magazine, and suggested that I write one also.  I promised him I would, but I certainly didn't promise him that it would be as well-written as his; R.T.'s piece provided some extremely helpful insights on crafting stories for that market, and if you haven't seen it I encourage you to go back and take a look.  Meanwhile, here's my take on the mysterious world of WW . . .

A little background info

My first Woman's World story appeared thirteen years ago, in their April 20, 1999, issue.  It was a mini-mystery called "Smoke Test" (they changed my title to "Switched Off"), about a guy plotting to electrocute his wife.  I followed that with stories in their July 20 and July 27, 1999, issues, one of which was a romance called "Elevator Music."  I tried a romance story not because I thought I was particularly good at writing them but because back then romances earned a thousand dollars a pop, compared to five hundred for mysteries, and I think I just got lucky.  In case you're interested, the max word count then was 1000 words for mysteries and 1500 for romances--now it's 700 and 800 words, respectively.  Payment for mysteries remains at $500 each, and romances are now $800.

The format was different as well, for mystery stories.  At that time they were just called mini-mysteries--a term I still use--and had a traditional story structure.  In late 2004 WW changed the mystery format to the one that still exists today, to make them more "interactive."  The new stories are called Solve-It-Yourself Mysteries, and they always end with a question to the reader and a "solution box" that R.T. has already explained.  The change was a decision that I'll admit I didn't agree with--I had already sold them eleven stories by that time, and I was comfortable with the regular narrative format.  But I once heard someone say that when the train of progress comes roaring down the tracks, you can either stand in the way and get squashed, or you can jump on it and ride.  I hopped aboard.  (The romances, by the way, didn't change; they are still traditionally structured.)

Hints and tips

If any of you haven't tried Woman's World but are interested in submitting a story to them, here are a few things about their mysteries that I've learned over the past years:

(1) Make the good guys win in the end.

(2) Include a lot of dialogue, if possible.

(3) Include a female protagonist.  She doesn't have to be the only protagonist--but she needs to be present.

(4) Include a crime.  If you have what appears to be a crime and then the facts prove that no crime actually occurred, that usually won't get the job done.

(5) Include humor whenever possible.

(6) Keep it fairly clean and fairly simple.  Avoid extreme violence, explicit sex, strong language, technical jargon, characters with physical or mental disabilities, overly complex plots, and exotic locations.  Familiar settings seem to work best.

(7) As mentioned, keep the word count below 700.  The last several mysteries I've sold them have all been between 680 and 690 words, including the solution.

I should note that on several occasions I have happily violated the above "rules"--sometimes intentionally and sometimes because of ignorance--and still made a sale.  In fact, the bad guys actually won in two of my first three mysteries for WW, and my first mystery included no dialogue at all.  And I can't seem to resist throwing a few technical terms around.  (On the other hand, I've written a lot of stories for them that followed all the rules, and still got rejected.  It's an inexact science.)

By the way, the fiction editor's name is Johnene Granger, and submissions should be addressed to her attention at Woman's World, 270 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632.

The creative process

As you writers already know, there are many ways to come up with a short story.  Some of us start with the characters, some with the setting, some with the theme, etc.  I start all my WW mysteries with the plot.  I dream up the situation and the crime and the solution, and only then do I populate the story with the folks who'll make it happen.  I'm not saying you should necessarily do it that way--but that seems to work best for me.

Once I have the "flow" of the story in mind, all the way to the ending, I sit down and type it into the computer.  For some reason, that first draft almost always turns out to be between 800 and a thousand words.  Then I start weeding out the things I don't need, and polishing the rest--especially the dialogue. I've found more success with the lighthearted mini-mysteries than with the gritty ones, so I also try to put in at least a little humor.

Another thing that's worked well for me is to come up with more than one vital clue to solving the case.  I have the main character figure one of the clues out and reveal it during the story, then I save the second (and more important) clue for the solution.  I don't do that every time, but when I do, it seems to add some variety and complexity.

Statistics

R.T. was asking about my WW track record, on submissions.  I suppose I'd have to say it's not good and it's not bad.  As for the "not good" part, I figure I've been rejected at least seventy times, and no matter how you spin it, that's a lot of misfires.  (I can't be certain of the number, because I've lengthened and reformatted many of those rejected stories and sold them elsewhere, while others sit there withering on the vine.)  Half a dozen were rejected with a note saying that if I would change something they'd reconsider the story, and in every one of those cases I made the requested change and it was then accepted.

On the asset side of the ledger, Woman's World has so far bought 46 of my stories--44 mysteries and two romances.  Two more mysteries were accepted but never got published.  I received kill fees (twenty percent of full payment) for both of those.  In answer to a question that I'm often asked, some of the titles of my stories were changed by the editor before publication and some were not; one story is scheduled to come out later this month, so I don't know yet about that one, but so far they've retained 25 of my original titles and changed the others.  The story that came out last week--the August 20 issue--was called "Caught in the Cross-fire," but my original title was "A Quick Stop."

In researching this piece, I found that the crimes involved in my published mini-mysteries have mostly been robberies and burglaries--at least two dozen of them.  Nine of the other crimes were murders, three were kidnappings, two were prison escapes, and the rest were a hodgepodge of fraud, carjackings, assault, blackmail, etc.  I was a little surprised at how many of my plots involved stealing of some kind, but I guess that makes sense in a way: a lot of my mysteries are sort of playful, which lend themselves more to theft than to killing.   And robberies--especially burglaries--often happen in familiar, domestic settings.


Afterthoughts

A taboo I forgot to mention: don't put pets in jeopardy.  I once sent WW a story about the dognapping of a Dalmatian puppy so young it didn't yet have its spots, which was of course part of the mystery.  That submission, even though no harm came to the puppy, was dropped like a hot potato, and when they told me why, I learned a valuable lesson.  Murder Aunt Clara if you must, but leave Fido the hell alone.

Also, don't get political or religious, and don't say anything potentially controversial.  In one of my older stories, I had the heroine ask the sheriff, referring to a possible suspect, "Would you trust someone who has blond hair and black eyebrows?"  He replied, "Hillary Clinton has blond hair and black eyebrows."  The lady said, "I rest my case."  WW bought the story, but changed the reply to "My wife has blond hair and black eyebrows."  Lesson: leave the Clintons alone as well.

On the subject of solutions, don't hinge the answer on information that not many people would know.  Don't have the murder victim leave a clue that's written in Chinese, or set the suspect's computer password to the date of the Hindenburg explosion, or kill the unfaithful wife using a poison with a ten-syllable name that can be found only on a tropical island her husband visited last month on a business trip.  Many of my rejections can be traced to an ignorance of (or disregard for) this rule.  The ideal solution should be something almost obvious, something hidden in plain sight, something that average readers might miss but could have figured out if they'd paid more attention.  Something that will make them slap their foreheads and say, "Whoa, I should've seen that."

A series situation

One final tip: I think part of my success with WW is due to the fact that I created, fairly early on, a series that features two recurring characters: a bossy retired schoolteacher and a pleasant but lazy guy she taught in the fifth grade, who is now the sheriff in their small southern town.  She's constantly butting in, hounding him to lose weight, correcting his grammar in front of his deputies, and generally making his life miserable--except that she almost always helps him solve the mysteries.

The main benefit of this is that it allows me to spend fewer words "setting up" each story.  Since I (and the reader) already know who these people are and how they'll act, I can jump straight into the action and not have to develop or describe the characters every single time.  Their nonstop bickering also gives me the opportunity to stir some humor into the mix.  I've strayed away from the series and sold them some standalone stories now and then, but I've always come back to it, for two reasons: (1) the editor said she wanted me to, and (2) these crazy people are fun to write about.

So that's that.  If you like mysteries and puzzles (Leigh and Rob and Dale, that means you guys) and if you like writing short, I hope you'll give WW a try.

You don't have to be a woman to visit that world.



03 August 2012

Me and the Mini-mystery


I hesitate to write this article, mainly because there is one amongst us who has much better credentials than I do in this particular area. And, that area now in discussion is writing mini-mysteries for Woman's World Magazine, I feel pretty good about having recently sold then my 10th story (that's a total of $5,000 so far), and I don't feel too bad about my .400 batting average. However, it seems to me that our John Floyd has placed at least four times as many mini-mysteries with them as I have and while I have no idea what his batting average is, I suspect it is a lot higher than .400.
Okay, I'll admit to being slightly hard-headed and making my own learning curve in this market. Sure, I could have purchased a copy of the magazine on a regular basis to study how other authors were getting accepted, but I always feel like the person behind the cash register is looking at me funny when they hand me my change and inquire if I'd prefer paper or plastic to carry this woman's magazine out of the store.

Anyway, trial and error showed me that the WWM editor did not want anything related to spies, violence, scary suspense and several other ideas I tried in order to differentiate my stories from the mass in the slush pile. I also found that the stories could not be too complicated.

In my mind, the mini-mystery has similar components to a joke. With a joke, you have the setup and the punch line. In the mini-mystery, you have the setup and the close out.

The setup in a mini-mystery is the plot or storyline which the author uses to present the mystery to the reader for solving. Like any mystery, appropriate clues must be planted in order to give the reader a "fair" chance to come up with the correct solution. Naturally, these clues may be hidden in plain view by throwing them  in with false clues, planting them at a distance in the story from a description of the crime, or even distracting the reader's attention to some other action going on.

 Any character arc is so short as to be almost negligible. As for setting or character description, the author has a maximum of 700 words to move around in. In one of my stories, in order to place a memorable image of my detective (sporting a large mustache) into the mind of the editor and that of potential readers, I once described him as looking like a soaked cat coming out of the rain. And, yes, the rainy weather also had to do with a clue to the solution in this one.

Since it often becomes difficult to create a mystery plot for these stories, much less 25 of them, I have adopted the strategy of mining plots from other books, such as those series which present five-minute or two-minute mysteries. I type up all those solutions in a long list and number them. Then, the next time I need to write a mini-mystery, I merely go down the list until one sparks an idea I think will work. This method saves me a lot of downtime scratching my head trying to figure out what to write from Square One. Instead, I get a running start from Square Two. Naturally, my settings and characters are different from the original mining operation. Look at it this way, there are only so many plots or "tribal lays" (according to Rudyard Kipling, there's nine and sixty), so I'm merely acquiring them in the order someone else wrote them and then forming those plots to my own purpose.

The close out part of the mini-mystery actually consists of two separate  parts, the Question and the Solution. They look similar to the following.

Question:  Why did (your detective) think (something) was wrong with the scene or the suspect's alibi?
OR
Question:  Who does (your detective) think committed the crime?

Solution:  (Author explains the clue(s) which solve(s) the mystery.)

Simple, huh? Just write short.

A couple of suggestions. You can write Why-dunnits, where the reader has to figure out what the detective is suspicious of and why, or write Who-dunnits, where the reader uses clues to select from a variety of suspects. Hey, I just realized I haven't tried a How-dunnit, where the reader has to figure out how the crime was committed. Well, there goes my learning curve again, unless John can give me some tips here. Actually, I'd like to see a column on this subject from John or at least hear how he managed to come up with those 40+ sales to WWM. That's amazing.
And now I must confess that a few days after receiving a contract from WWM for my 10th mini-mystery as mentioned in my last blog, I went to the mailbox and found another white, #10 business envelope postmarked from Seattle. Sadly, there was no contract in this one. My .400 batting average just took a dip.

It's my own fault. I violated one of my own learning curve rules, the one about not having the solution depend upon a little known fact. Rob can tell you I mentioned this rule to him last year, long before I wrote this latest rejection. One of these days I've got to start listening to myself. But, it was such a good story and I was in a hurry to get on the road to South Dakota for a few weeks to help take care of my mother-in-law (my biggest writing fan), so I sent it anyway. Otherwise, I'd have run it by Rob and he could have saved me the postage. Next time.

13 July 2012

Working for The Woman


A few weeks back, I went to the mailbox with my usual expectations of both hope and dread. The writer's hope of good news, such as a contract or something of interest from the world of writing. But then, there's also the dread of receiving a very unnecessary rejection of one's most excellent creation. Of course, the box could contain nothing more than junk mail and bills. Those, I give to my wife, Kiti.

On this day, nestled in with the utilities bill, an offer of a free steak dinner if we listened to a lecture on how to invest our money in a retirement fund, two health insurance companies who desperately wanted my future business, plus several discount coupons from various stores offering to save me some money, was a single, plain white, #10 business envelope with one of my address labels on it. No return address. The postmark was Seattle.

I quickly recognized this envelope as the SASE I had enclosed with a mini-mystery manuscript submitted to Woman's World Magazine. In the more distant past, such an envelope would contain two pieces of paper. They would either be a form rejection letter and the first page of the rejected manuscript, OR they would be a very nice congratulatory letter of acceptance and a one-page contract stating when this story was to be published and the $500 fee the author was to receive in a few weeks.
HOWEVER, last year in reply to my 24th submission, I had received an e-mail from Johnene Granger, the column editor, stating that she needed an electronic copy of my manuscript because the head editor wanted to be able to look at a mock-up of the proposed magazine issue on screen before he made his final decisions. Thus, an e-mail request meant the column editor liked the story and there was only one more hurdle to pass. A follow-up e-mail would then provide info on acceptance or rejection, and the contract still came in one's SASE.

Advance notice on what to expect in the snail mail. I could live with that, after all that's how they bought my 24th submission in 2011. Problem now was here I stood holding the return envelope on my 25th submission and there had been no advance e-mail from Seattle. CRAP!

My questioning fingertips felt the envelope. Yep, it was the usual two pages thick. Same as always. And, you can't tell a one-page contract from the first page of a rejected manuscript.

Should I pour a Jack and Coke before opening, or just tear into the envelope and pour the drink later? Maybe pry up one corner of the seal and sneak a peek? Nah, be a man and take it on the chin. All or nothing. It's not the end of the world.

RIP!

TEAR!

PULL OUT!

Sonofagun, it's a contract and a congratulatory letter of acceptance. A hand-written personal note at the bottom of the letter says, "Thanks for another good one, Johnene Granger."
Whatever happened to the advance e-mail notice program and the mock-up on screen for the head editor before accetance? At this point I don't really care. The Woman has just accepted my 25th submission. Let's see, that makes 10 acceptances and 15 rejections. A whopping 40% goes to the plus side for that market. My average is improving. It's another writing credit, which you the reading public can run right out to your local grocery store and find "Officer, It Was Self-Defense" in Woman's World Magazine, issue #31 with an on-sale date of July 19th. Hey, that was yesterday. Better hurry, that issue is only on the racks for one week. (Actually, Dix had a last minute uploading problem, plus his Dad was having eye surgery, and he flat ran out of time. Therefore, we swapped weeks and  this is early, so don't look for that magazine until next week.)

Moving on. Tune in next time when I go over some personal notes about writing those 700 words or less, $500 mini-mysteries. But right now, you'll have to excuse me, I have to go back to working for The Woman.