Four Simple Ways to Expand the Novel's Wordcount
- Thread starter dondomat
- Start date
- Status
I enjoyed this article, OP. Yes, some books that are lacking length may be lacking in actual story, but there are also times when folks stick too closely to the main plot, and write it like it's a race to the finish. I can't tell you how many writers here on this very forum say that that's how they do their first draft, and then they use the second to flesh it out. Your suggestions are good ways to flesh a story out. Certainly they need to be used in a way that enhances the story rather than bogs it down, but they are useful tools with which to craft a well-crafted tale. As with any tool, one can use it effectively or not, depending on the skill of the wielder.
I used some of these very suggestions to add 3k words to a romance MS of mine so that it met the word count specifications of the place I was sending it. The MS was 77k, it needed to be 80k. I didn't ruin my story with excess padding, I used the practical need to expand the MS to give the tale a smidgeon more depth.
Sure, tell the story you want to tell, but in the writing business, sometimes word count becomes a real consideration. The publisher I sent my MS to would be a good fit. I'd hate to miss that opportunity because I was 3k words short.
I used some of these very suggestions to add 3k words to a romance MS of mine so that it met the word count specifications of the place I was sending it. The MS was 77k, it needed to be 80k. I didn't ruin my story with excess padding, I used the practical need to expand the MS to give the tale a smidgeon more depth.
Sure, tell the story you want to tell, but in the writing business, sometimes word count becomes a real consideration. The publisher I sent my MS to would be a good fit. I'd hate to miss that opportunity because I was 3k words short.
A good point. The tone is somewhat misleading. I think they are good ways one might employ to raise word count. It's not a list of what everyone has to do in every situation.
I think that all advice is bad advice when taken at face value. "Show, don't tell" is simultaneously the best advice and the worst advice there is.
Honestly, I'm not sure there is a way to phrase advice without the potential for someone taking it entirely the wrong way.
And for what it's worth, I'm with Dondomat in that there does need to be proper, concrete answers to these questions. Yes, sometimes someone does need to be told how important proper nutrition is to building their biceps, but that's not what they are asking.
Now you know why politicians running for election are told to never give specific answers to questions. The next time someone asks how to boost their word count, simply reply "butt in chair" and leave it at that.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 5,313
- Reaction score
- 569
- Location
- MA
- Website
- eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
Quoted for agreement. I disagree with the delivery of the OP, but not the premise of giving concrete answers. I often write short like the people who keep asking this question do. The only difference is that I know I write short even if I don't always know where I'm shortening things too much. That's why I use an alpha reader, once I've gotten all the mistakes corrected, or description I can see are needed on my own done. It goes off to her for another pair of eyes to help with edits I've missed by being too close to the story, whether its tiny instances of using the wrong tense or seeing discriptions in a paragraph that are in my head and not on the page.
Maybe we should have a sticky thread about this topic if we don't, Proper Ways to Increase Wordcount. It is a very basic question that's asked a lot on this forum and it could be usefull. Any one needing more specific advice could still ask, but I bet a lot would get what they need from it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2007
- Messages
- 15,599
- Reaction score
- 2,471
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Website
- www.annazabo.com
The problem is that what any particular novel needs in order to expand (or contract) word count is never ever ever a one-size-fits-all answer.
I expanded a novel from 43K to 60K. None of it was done by padding out description. What the novel needed (and what my agent suggested I add) was a deeper understanding of the character's backgrounds to support their motivations and actions.
But try explaining to anyone how to accomplish that. Because, in the end, it's the writer's job to figure that out. It's not easy. It's not formulaic. And your novel will probably need something entirely different.
However, if you're trying to win NaNoWriMo, this is great advice.
I expanded a novel from 43K to 60K. None of it was done by padding out description. What the novel needed (and what my agent suggested I add) was a deeper understanding of the character's backgrounds to support their motivations and actions.
But try explaining to anyone how to accomplish that. Because, in the end, it's the writer's job to figure that out. It's not easy. It's not formulaic. And your novel will probably need something entirely different.
However, if you're trying to win NaNoWriMo, this is great advice.
I just finished a literary "thriller" that won all kinds of awards, yada-yada-whatever, and while I was very impressed with the prose early on, I was intensely skimming by the end. At one point, the author devoted two pages to describing a hangover, when it really only needed one sentence, two max. Description has its place, but overdoing it hurts the story (doesn't matter how talented a writer you are) and risks boring the reader. I have a sparse writing style, so this may just be a matter of personal preference, but overall, I hate "padding."
For what it's worth, I always struggle to hit my goal wordcount.
For what it's worth, I always struggle to hit my goal wordcount.
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2009
- Messages
- 6,004
- Reaction score
- 1,233
On the one hand, I agree that sometimes nebulous answers to questions really do come down to what works for the writer and vary on a case-by-case, writer-by-writer, and sometimes project-by-project basis.
On the other, sometimes all that's necessary to get someone unstuck from a nebulous question is to give them an arsenal of answers (personal perspective or specific but still generic) to show them that there is more than one way to approach it.
I take it back to my frustration upon being told 'read your favorite books to learn from them'. For me that was useless advice. I wanted to. I was trying. But flapping hands at me and saying 'just do it' didn't work. I had no damn idea how. It wasn't until I ran up on some advice from a how-to book and the author gave very specific advice on how to take a passage from a book apart that I finally understood.
I still would not have understood if the author had gotten in line with all the other advice and said 'YOU JUST DO, OKAY?' which is pretty much what most writing advice amounts to these days.
So while dondomat's advice may not work across the board, it may not work in all cases, it's a lot better to say something more specific than to wave hands like clouds to get a new writer started in thinking about what might be wrong and how to possibly approach fixing it.
On the other, sometimes all that's necessary to get someone unstuck from a nebulous question is to give them an arsenal of answers (personal perspective or specific but still generic) to show them that there is more than one way to approach it.
I take it back to my frustration upon being told 'read your favorite books to learn from them'. For me that was useless advice. I wanted to. I was trying. But flapping hands at me and saying 'just do it' didn't work. I had no damn idea how. It wasn't until I ran up on some advice from a how-to book and the author gave very specific advice on how to take a passage from a book apart that I finally understood.
I still would not have understood if the author had gotten in line with all the other advice and said 'YOU JUST DO, OKAY?' which is pretty much what most writing advice amounts to these days.
So while dondomat's advice may not work across the board, it may not work in all cases, it's a lot better to say something more specific than to wave hands like clouds to get a new writer started in thinking about what might be wrong and how to possibly approach fixing it.
Last edited:
I agree with the posts that say you expand the word count only where it needs expanding. And I don’t think the original poster meant to add without discrimination. Or to say the examples were the ONLY ways to add wordage.
As for the opposite problem, subtracting word count, I’d say that you should only do this when it’s needed. Also, sometimes you may need to subtract words to sharpen the description, to say the same thing but in a more vivid and evocative way. (I’m reminded of the writer of a letter who started it off by saying, “I’m sorry this is so long; I didn’t have time to make it short.”)
On adding subplots. The idea of subplots is not to just throw in more words. The subplot should enhance the main plot, by adding character or needed background or whatever.
Too, adding a complication of the main plot is NOT adding a subplot. It’s lengthening of the main plot in places where it might otherwise be too skimpy to be believable.
As for the opposite problem, subtracting word count, I’d say that you should only do this when it’s needed. Also, sometimes you may need to subtract words to sharpen the description, to say the same thing but in a more vivid and evocative way. (I’m reminded of the writer of a letter who started it off by saying, “I’m sorry this is so long; I didn’t have time to make it short.”)
On adding subplots. The idea of subplots is not to just throw in more words. The subplot should enhance the main plot, by adding character or needed background or whatever.
Too, adding a complication of the main plot is NOT adding a subplot. It’s lengthening of the main plot in places where it might otherwise be too skimpy to be believable.
"Add subplots" could just as easily lead a new writer astray as "add description". Who wants to read characters suddenly drop everything to stroll around the zoo? Not I.
Now, of course, that's a subplot done wrong, but layering tons of description is description done wrong.
Now, of course, that's a subplot done wrong, but layering tons of description is description done wrong.
Giving advice without proper analysis of the underlying issue is like a doctor prescribing pills without examining the patient. Yes, sometimes a headache is a headache. But a headache is a common symptom to many different ills, some more serious than others.
-cb
Last edited:
I know where you're coming from, and I generally agree with you, but if someone asks for a specific piece of advice, you should give them that advice.
A doctor examining a patient before prescribing medicine is one thing, but a doctor saying; "I know you've asked for something to help this headache, but hold on a second while I tell you about how lifestyle changes could help you..."
Yes, that advice may be valuable, and yes, it maybe be relevant, but I just want you to give me a feckin' pill or twenty.
In the past, when answering questions similar to this, I've always opted to answer the question as best I can and then go through everything that needs to follow it:
Cryptic Example said:
That way, they get the simple answer they asked for, and any context they need.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,373
- Reaction score
- 225
The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire, eh?
In the 20th century two major size-related upheaval happened to genre fiction—one was the transition from short story format to slim paperback novels, and the second—about 20-30 years later—the transition from slim paperback novels to bloated ‘respectable’-sized mothers.
Of the authors I quoted two belong to the first era of transition from short story format to slim paperback—Hammett and Chandler—and two belong to the transition from short novels to swollen novels—Koontz and King.
In Stephen King, in fact, we can see in compressed form the transition from short stories to slim novel to bloated novel in the space of 2-3 years. Phylogenesis and Ontogenesis and telekinetic girls and alien clowns in sewers...
In the early 1970’s, while still a dirt-poor provincial family with toddler to take care of, the King family depended not only on the day-jobs of both parents, but also on the extras earned by King’s stories.
Short stories tend to be paid by the word. So, when confronted with the need to make $200, but with a story length that would bring in only $120, what did young King do—add the missing wordcount by a description here and an internal dialogue there and a back story bit in that corner over there—or did he look grimly at his kids and say, “no medicine for you, kiddo—the needs of my story’s authenticity are supreme!”
Of course, by the time King was doing this, short stories were already just a source of additional income, but a couple of decades before that short stories paid enough to make a living. Until they stopped, that is, and the transition to paperback novels happened.
So, when the genre writers of that era wrote short stories for a living, did their story lengths spontaneously lead to the maximum cent-per-word profit?
Extry-extry, read all about it! Amazing discovery by science! Spontaneous plot demands of stories by professionals always overlap with maximum profit! Glory be!
So, when the short story era came to a close, and slim genre novels took over—did the pioneers of this transition—for example Hammett and Chandler—say to themselves, “I may have used certain wordcount tricks for my stories, but now that I will write novels—I will start from a blank slate. No more manuscript-size-inflating tricks! From now on, only brevity,
I have no decisive proof they didn’t say this to themselves, neither do I have decisive proof Santa’s elves didn’t manufacture and plant into the ground fake dinosaur bones four hundred years ago just to screw with us.
IMO, it is reasonable to assume that what craft tricks the short story writers learned before the crossover, were carried over, in modified form, to the slim paperback.
Decades later, King progresses from stories to a short novel—Carrie—and then to a bloated novel—Salem’s Lot, and then—more and more so. At the very same time Dean Koontz was also struggling to leave the slim paperback ghetto and enter the lucrative fat thriller club, and by 1977-9—succeeds.
A tangle of storylines and a POV carousel helps make a novel more epic, but even so, it can remain at a level of around 40K—as King’s, Graham Masterton’s, James Herbert’s, and Shaun Hutson’s earliest novels show—they have more subplots and story twists and POV characters than one can shake a stick at, but still—40 000 words.
Does all this in any way mean that short stories are automatically inferior to slim paperbacks, or that fat doorstoppers are automatically superior to said snappy paperbacks? I, personally, prefer a 40K Michael Moorcock fantasy to contemporary endless games of soaps, or a 50K James Bond to a trans-fat-crammed contemporary international thriller, and a Ray Bradbury short story is worth more to me than 10 installments of a contemporary space opera saga. But if someone asks for tips on reaching games of soaps lengths, with emphasis on length, I will not instead tell them, for their own good, no less, how they should be true to themselves and follow Elmore Leonard’s rules on writing.
Q. So I want to write a big fat mother of a thriller like my favorite author Nelson Demille…
A. No you don’t. What you want is to follow your heart and be true to your art and write transparent minimalist prose like Hemingway and Elmore Leonard.
Q. But my heart wants to write a big fat mother…
A. No it doesn’t! You deaf, boy? I said you need stripped down existentialist examination of the human condition.
Q. But I—
A. I said brevity, dammit! Transparent Hemingway! Elmore the translucent! You must appease them! *Lowers voice* they watch us when we sleep and take showers, you know...
Now, a fat mother novel size is achieved through many ways, not least of all plot twists, subplots, POV character rotation—but one can learn about this in many places, for instance Uncle Jim’s wonderful insights. Four ways to add to the size which are not to do with plot twists, subplots, POV character rotation—nor even the sacred “character depth”—is what the original post of this thread is about.
In order to make a novel work—a thin novel or a fat novel—one must have talent and be a pro. This thread is not called “four simple ways to become a talented pro”. This is not what is being offered here. Really, if you don't trust me--trust the evidence of your senses.
What I did do in this thread is give four examples of prose-level size-inflation. Perhaps I should use a more politically correct term, in order to not trip defensiveness alarms from people who are too deep and true to tolerate such fake things?
How about “length-enchantment techniques?”
“Enhanced text development”?
“Pro-active paragraph growth management”?
Possible new title: “Four moderately easy to understand approaches to pro-active paragraph growth management”
A. I want to build my biceps fast, in like three weeks
B. No you don’t. You want to eat lots of greens and practice yoga and give me a stool sample
A. I’m pretty sure I want none of that—I just want to know how many times a day to lift my weights and how many times to repeat and…say, why you’re giving me that look?
B. A wise guy, eh? So you want to drop dead and make your poor parents cry at your funeral is that it? Biceps? Is that all you can think about? I said give me that stool sample! Must have stool sample now or Hulk smash!
[FONT="]1[/FONT][FONT="]sim·ple[/FONT]
[FONT="]adjective[/FONT][FONT="] \ˈsim-pəl\ [/FONT]
[FONT="]: not hard to understand or do[/FONT]
I used the term “simple” in the “not hard to understand” sense. Ever the starry-eyed optimist, me.
Last edited:
> if someone asks for a specific piece of advice,
> you should give them that advice.
In other words, always disregard the underlying problem.
-cb
> you should give them that advice.
In other words, always disregard the underlying problem.
-cb
I think you would have done well to quote the post to which you're replying, in which I explicitly say that I try to give both the advice and address the problem.
So no, not always.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,373
- Reaction score
- 225
Ok Dondomat, now really impress us by coming up with 4 rules for keeping forum posts succinct
Naw, mine would the opposite advice: how to make posts reach magazine cover story size...
I can imagine the ordeal of asking the time of day and then, instead of getting an answer, having to fill out a questionnaire about why I delude myself in thinking I need to know the time of day
Last edited:
I always grit my teeth when I read obvious padding.
It doesn't seem to occur to some writers that I already know how a door handle operates, how tea is poured into a cup, how a foot has to press the accelarator to get a car moving. Get on with the f&$%ing story!
It doesn't seem to occur to some writers that I already know how a door handle operates, how tea is poured into a cup, how a foot has to press the accelarator to get a car moving. Get on with the f&$%ing story!
- Joined
- May 10, 2014
- Messages
- 438
- Reaction score
- 57
As someone who has created one of these recent threads that dondomat is surely referring to, I am glad to have received this advice.
My plot is pretty complex already, and I am struggling with a low word count. So instead of getting the normal advice of 'add more complexity and subplots,' I welcome this.
Of course, reading the rest of the comments is helpful too. But I doubt anyone is actually naive enough to read this and think that they should go to every scene and 500 words about the character taking a dump, and then another 500 describing the backstory of the turd.
My plot is pretty complex already, and I am struggling with a low word count. So instead of getting the normal advice of 'add more complexity and subplots,' I welcome this.
Of course, reading the rest of the comments is helpful too. But I doubt anyone is actually naive enough to read this and think that they should go to every scene and 500 words about the character taking a dump, and then another 500 describing the backstory of the turd.
This thread, like much of AW, is a masterclass in itself. Thanks for the discussion, gang.
I recently took a 6500 word story, which editors had liked but called 'thin', up to a 25K novella. I did that by examining the MC's goals, motivations, and conflicts, and showing those as clearly as I could. Every time I found a placeholder transition or a narrated action scene, I reworked it with more detail. While making certain they did at least two things: move the story, show character depth or growth, and anchor worldbuilding. This was not an easy process.
I'm currently expanding another 6K short story to at least 20K. This time I'm leaving the original story largely intact and adding backstory and conflict from earlier in the characters' lives.
I recently took a 6500 word story, which editors had liked but called 'thin', up to a 25K novella. I did that by examining the MC's goals, motivations, and conflicts, and showing those as clearly as I could. Every time I found a placeholder transition or a narrated action scene, I reworked it with more detail. While making certain they did at least two things: move the story, show character depth or growth, and anchor worldbuilding. This was not an easy process.
I'm currently expanding another 6K short story to at least 20K. This time I'm leaving the original story largely intact and adding backstory and conflict from earlier in the characters' lives.
- Status