I have suffered these past ten days from "Blog Neglect."  I apologize to you kindly souls who have reported back to me with appreciation for whatever words of "wisdom" I have set forth in my corner of Blogland.

Yes, I have been writing–steadily–mainly editing.  About ten years ago I completed the manuscript of a 70,000-word novel about a woman whose widowhood, being kidnapped in her own car, her having a romantic entanglement, dealing with 'boomerang" kids, etc. have formed the primary action in the story.  A month ago I attended a talk offered by an active agent for women's fiction and decided to get back to work on that novel–stored safely in my computer files.  It has required lots of editing, re-editing, and re-editing.  I am now at the stage of having printed a copy of every chapter, holding the sheets in my lap with my feet up while I ink-in needed changes not caught when I did the "first" edit on the computer. 

I didn't believe that I could change the last names of my characters, put events out of sequence, and leave out an entire chapter describing a key event that needed to be described to make the plot hold together. I find that–over the years of working periodically on this story,  I changed the makes of automobiles belonging to my characters, and their occupations.  Lots still to be done.  I will report on progress, and send up a grand halleluia that will be recorded here after I type "The End."  I have worked on this daily except for the time spent in my writer workshops and time to eat and sleep.

In response to the excellent presentation by Scott Eagan of Greyhaus Agency (Washington State), I have been preparing the business letter/query, the synopsis, and editing the first three pages of my women's novel to send to him.  I would not have believed it, because I have been writing query letters for years–many of them quite successful in gaining me assignments, but I re-wrote that letter five times–printing it out each time as I "see" mistakes better when they are on a sheet of paper than on the computer screen.  The 5th re-print came when I discovered that I had misspelled Scott's last name in the salutation.  I had spelled it "Egan" when it is supposed to be "Eagan."  I should be 100% sensitive to the spelling of names as mine is misspelled 99% of the time.  (I'm the only Wilma in captivity who spells her name Willma.  Misspelling an addressee's name is probably the most egregious error one can make in addressing someone you want to impress with your skill, your accuracy, your story.

That was not the only section I re-wrote.  The three-page synopsis, double spaced, also went from brain to fingers to printed page a number of times. I had to summarize the 70,500-word manuscript in the three pages, get in all the essentials, the main character, her personality, the crises she faced, her resolutions and an ending that shows the character having learned by her mistakes and points toward a brighter horizon.

Then the third piece of writing I was to include:  the first three pages (doble-spaced) of the manuscript, resulted in my re-reading my manuscript's opening to make certain EVERY WORD COUNTS in intriguing the reader and advancing the story.  I eliminated a number of words, re-placed some with more graphic dimensions.This went into the mail on Aug. 1.  I will report the results–good or bad–on this page–probably a month or more from now. 

Check and re-check your writing–everything from cover letter to the impact of the story in its opening.  If it does not engage the agent in those first few pages, you can be sure it will not "fly" into the hands of a publisher. 

Encouragement sometimes comes in very small packages.  I had submitted a children's short story to the famous Highlights Magazine.  (Nothing like starting at the top.) The rejection letter lists 16 reasons why a manuscript may be rejected. . They didn't check the bloc that says "The story is well written but lacks freshness" nor the one that says "It lacks a strong plot."   The block that reads "Not suited for our present needs" was checked for my manuscrit.–AND–at the bottom of the letter was a hand-written sentence: "Thank you for thinking of us."  This is subtle encouragement. Yes, my story was rejected. But itt went into the mail THAT DAY to the next possible children's market..  Most important, my story did not fit their PRESENT NEEDS.  I will try them again with another story that may fit those "persent needs."

This reminds me that years ago I had submitted an article to an agriculture magazine when I was living in the San Joaquin Valley of California where more than 250 commercial crops are grown.  Most of my articles were interviews and photos of farmers/farm families.   I had waited anxiously for a reply that did not come with the usual speed of response (in those days editors responded much faster than they do now).  When the envelope finally came, it was a fat one and I assumed it held the returned article..  I had high hopes of marketing that particular manuscript.  I set the fat envelope aside for a couple of days.  When I finally opened it, I found a contract–two copies–and a note of acceptance.

 A few days ago, I received a window envelope with only a Box number in Texas in the return corner. I set it aside for "more important" mail.  It got shuffled in with the magazines and daily newspaper I receive and it wasn't until I was clearing "refuse" the next morning that I re-found the envelope and opened it.  It contained a check for a submission I'd forgotten I'd sent.

Morale to the stories:  the mail can bring Wins as well as Woes.