Susanne Dunlap made my entire day, and probably my entire month. After reading the first 13 chapters of Chasing Money, she said, “This is a well-written, well-plotted thriller with engaging characters, a strong voice, and a great setting. You are a natural storyteller with a vivid imagination.” Wow!
I sent her my manuscript on August 23rd, then I sent it again a few days later with some mistakes corrected. Then I sat and waited for her feedback. It’s enormously important to me. Yes, I got some positive validation last month from Anne Stanton, but now I want the details. What is working in the book, and what’s not. What are my strengths and what are the weak points that I need to work on?
The information I wanted came today, in Susanne’s four-page review, along with a lightly marked-up copy of my manuscript. Some excerpts from the highlights:
Dialogue
Your dialogue is true to character and very colorful. I rarely lose track of who is speaking, but you make none of the rookie mistakes of repeating names too often or adding descriptive dialogue tags. This is probably because you put words in your characters’ mouths that are so vivid and strong you don’t feel as if you need them.
Voice
Your narrator’s character comes through beautifully throughout the manuscript. I especially appreciate the authorial intervention, the moments (delicately threaded in) where you address the reader directly. It gives the sense that the reader is sitting at a dinner table engrossed in a story being told by someone fascinating. Such a device doesn’t always work, but I think you’ve succeeded with it here.
Characters
The main characters are largely well-drawn and distinct from each other. The protagonist and the characters in his world are very believable. They behave in consistent ways and their decisions in the face of difficult circumstances are logical and true to who they are. They are well-rounded and complex. I like that the “hero” has his anti-heroic side.
Setting/Descriptions
You have created very real, very tangible places, choosing details well to establish the mood and texture of a setting. You enliven your descriptions with many surprising turns of phrase and metaphors that work and often provoke a smile. You also explain the world of startups very well, making sure the reader gets the idea of what is going on, and the financial knife-edge their enterprise is poised upon.
Narrative Tension
With the exceptions I detail below, your pacing is good overall. The scene of Marty in the woods with his dog is masterfully heart-pounding. More of that, please!
Areas for Improvement
Susanne’s thoughts on what could be strengthened were longer and more detailed. Here are a few excerpts:
Scenes with Dialogue
There are several scenes that I feel go on too long, where you reiterate things the reader already knows. I got the feeling that you’re having so much fun with it you don’t want to stop. But your reader has a limited attention span, and wants the plot to move along, especially in a book like this. The rule of thumb with scene and dialogue is to arrive late and leave early.
She specifically called out the first scene with the Russian, the scene with the baron at his house, and the encounter with the aging artist for some significant trimming, and provided examples in her markup of my manuscript.
Secondary Characters
Your character development in the case of the narrator’s wife (Abbie) is generally very good. I completely understood where she is coming from, how she could be pushed to the limit of her ability to go along with her husband’s wild financial schemes, and his underlying affection and regard for her…you tend to go a little overboard with their history and backstory though, to the point that it interrupts and slows the pace of the plot.
Your vignette of the artist’s assistant is great. We not only get a clear picture of who she is, but we learn more about other characters—and deepen the mystery—through her brief appearance. It does much more than the lengthy misbehavior scene with the artist himself.
However, my one criticism pertains to the character of the Russian. He feels a little bit like a cardboard cutout, a stereotype of what you’d expect a Russian mobster to be. This is apparent through his dialogue as well as his actions.
Susanne then gave me some specific suggestions for improving how I handle the Russian’s dialogue, as well as some ideas to consider to make this very important character more complex and believable.
Backstory:
This is one of the trickiest areas in a novel, especially one that needs to hurtle the reader forward, like a thriller. It’s hard to give the reader enough backstory to fill in the blanks without bogging down story present. Like dialogue, the rule is that less is more.
Your long digression into the past history of the baron, for instance, adds little to the development of the plot. All we need to know is that he has the capacity to get involved in such a foolish enterprise, and possible access to a painting worth ten-million. The complications of his family history are irrelevant to the reader. You, the author, need to have thought it through, to help plug any potential holes in logic, but the reader only needs the key points.
Plot
By and large, I am drawn in by the plot. However, you do take your time to get it going, to get to the point where the reader begins to have some idea of why the three men were taped to chairs in the cabin in the woods. I think that trimming the scenes I mention above might well ameliorate that, but it’s worth bearing in mind.
Susanne also identified what she thought was a potential hole in the plot, which I’m not going to describe here as it would give too much of the story away. It’s something I’ve thought about, and will need to make clear in the chapters to come.
Overall, I’m thrilled with the results of my initial foray into working with a book coach. Susanne has given me new confidence in my work, and also helped me to identify the areas I need to strengthen. This investment has been well worth it!
Michael
