Friday, March 8, 2013

Aspiring Advice: What's a RetCon?


A couple weeks ago, I posted about my awesome CPs (critique partners) and their informing me of a term called "Lampshading." Well, my friends ... they've done it again! If you have a CP group, or someone who is interested in reading your work, and volunteered to give their opinion, this is a writer-mind trick that may prove useful.

In the past, I would share a chapter with my group, and they would make suggestions. Sometimes, the suggestions were so extensive that it required rewrites in parts, which is great. Anything to make the story better, right? Because of this, I felt it was best to resubmit that chapter and have my group read it again. They were happy to do so, but I wasn't aware of an issue I was perpetuating - by rehashing previous chapters, I was taking them away from the story ...

Detour Sign Clip ArtDo this enough and it can get old. Quick. So is there a way to keep our groups informed of what we've changed without subjecting them to another reread? And, in turn, allow us to move our writing forward and keep our submissions fresh? You bet - and it is called a ...

RetCon (Retroactive Continuity): its origin stemming from the comic book world, is to "revise an aspect of a fictional work retrospectively, typically by introducing a piece of new information that imposes a different interpretation on previously described events."

In other words, if there is a problem with a scene, revise that scene, and then let your readers know of these changes with your next submission, either by stating the RetCons in your next email or on the submission before the chapter starts - use up that white space.

For example, I had a scene in my Undead WiP that my readers had an issue with. I agreed that something had to be done about it. I wrote a solution and told them about the changes at our next meeting.

(The following example isn't based on my stuff ... just yet ...)

In chapter 4, Jay is chased down an alley and runs into a dead end. Bullies show up to beat him up, but then a garbage man uses super-awesome-explosive magic to save Jay and make the bullies go away.

Critique: "It may not be a big deal, but the magic felt forced. There was no lead up or foreshadow, which took me out of the story a bit. Maybe introduce the garbage man sooner, before he uses magic?

I make changes, prepare to send chapter 5 with this included:

Here's a RetCon: In chapter 4, Jay jumps into a dumpster instead of running into the dead end. When the bullies leave, Jay gets out and meets the garbage man, who uses magic to clean him up.

By doing this, CPs know where the story is going without making them reread anything, and they can enjoy plowing into new material. True, a RetCon might effect something else written later on, but it's better to find issues and edit them out before our readers see it.

*     *     *

This is not the rule, just my thoughts on the matter. There may be a time when a reread is needed, such as a whole chapter rewrite, but when it's just a few small things, like a character name change or some other detail that doesn't compromise the continuity of the story, a "head's up" can go a long way over retreading old ground.

Have you used the RetCon with your CPs and readers? If so, how has it helped move your writing along? If not, want to give it a try?

I'm off to WHIE for the weekend. Have a blast this weekend! I'll tell you all about it on Monday, with some very special book releases!

I'm David, and bring on the Iron Men!

20 comments:

  1. Usually they only see my manuscript once. If it's a major thing, I'll run my changes past Rusty.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I had to do a lot of retroactive continuity when I finished the end of the Scarlet Knight series. Which made me glad I wasn't publishing them right away. I think the changes made the stories stronger. Of course that's just my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's so interesting to learn how other people crit. I'm like Alex, my CP's usually just see my MS once. I'm not ready to share anything until I've got an entire draft down and cleaned it up a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That's how my CPs and I have always done it- otherwise it might take years just to get through the manuscript if we re-read. Although lots is lost on the read through anyway when read chapter by chapter and sometimes voice can be changed...so I like full reads best.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Once is good, twice if there were major changes.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't really use beta readers or critique partners all that much. But it sounds like a fine idea. The reason I stopped using betas is because I felt like I was soliciting validation, and I decided that this is not where I want to be as a writer. I don't want to have to depend on any psychological validation as to whether what I'm writing is interesting or not.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'll usually read a second version for someone. Not sure about a third, but I can get through reading a novel twice if there have been significant changes. I figure that's my job as a critique partner. But it really is hard to ask people to get as involved in your story as you are. Somehow it just seems easier to ask new people to read new versions rather than make the same ones read it over and over again.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I generally defer to having new readers take a look--particularly if it's longer work. If I have specific questions about a critter's feedback, I'll ask, or maybe send them a page or two of adjustments to get their thoughts.

    If it's a shorter work, I might ask them to re-read it, but with only minor notes, like, "Yes, you've got it." or "No, it still isn't working."

    ReplyDelete
  9. I've never submitted my crap a chapter at a time to my cps. It doesn't really work for me. I like to write the whole thing an then do a hug RetCon! Just me.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Really interesting post, thanks for explaining!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I've seen this word before but didn't know what it meant. And I was kind of afraid to ask because it seemed like everyone knew about it but me LOL. So I appreciate this post! And I didn't know about lampshading either so I've learned two things today. :)

    Enjoy your weekend!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lol. I have a problem with making people reread my work when I change it. (And I o a lot of changing.) I'll have to keep this in mind. Thanks for the tip.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yay for Ironman 3 (had to get that out of the way - looking forward to seeing it!).

    I have some critique partners, but like others, they only see the ms once. And I don't normally let anyone read my book until I've gone through it twice (second time I add the meat - emotion & description). I'm a pantser and the beginning will ALWAYS change once I reach the end (as well as other details I can then fill in). You do what works for you, right?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I may have used RetCon without knowing it had a name. We tried to move a story forward in the writing group I was in so we just mentioned certain things that were touched upon and reviewed chapter by chapter and usually tried to do that with an upcoming chapter if a patterened issue shows up.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Have fun at WHIE!

    I usually only submit once these days... except shorts. I might submit a short story multiple times. A Retcon is a good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I have used it. Those readers can really point out stuff that doesn't quite work. What would do without them.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I'm with Alex. Usually, once is enough. Occasionally, if I'm struggling with something, then I'll run the new version past a trusted critter or two.

    Liked your post on lampshading. I hadn't heard the term either, but I'd figured out the concept--let your character scoff at something so your audience doesn't scoff at you. LOL Very good tool to have.

    If I haven't said it already, love your new blog look.

    ReplyDelete
  18. RetCon sounds like a great way to handle major rewrites, didn't know there was a specific term for it, but it sounds like a good idea. And I am so pumped for Iron Man 3!

    ReplyDelete
  19. That sounds like a great timesaving tip. I think I am one to let CPs see something a second time, but probably not after that!

    ReplyDelete
  20. I'm lucky that my main CPs are willing to read my manuscript more than once. Of course, I do the same for them :)

    ReplyDelete