Helpful advice on writing two books wanted. No honest.

[bmac]

I am currently writing two books (well, three if you count the 250 pages so far of the account of the attack on Thiepval, 1.7.16 ) which have a considerable degree of overlap. One (Book 1) is about the planning of the Battle of the Somme which, apart from an account as to how the British and French plans developed, also includes material about how pre-war tactical changes, training, equipment improvements (or not), etc., impacted on how these plans took shape. This one is 75% done. As you do, I am also working on a book (Book 2) about the attack of the French VIe Army on the Somme on 1.7.16. This necessarily includes a lot of the same information about the pre-war French Army and the development of the French plans as in the first book.

I have several choices about how these elements appear in the second (VIe Army) book:

1. I can simply cut, paste and edit where necessary from Book 1, but this does mean that a significant element of Book 1 will appear pretty much word for word in Book 2 (c. 20% ish);

2. I can re-write for Book 2 the parts which appear in both which will take a lot of time and will result in the same information appearing only in a somewhat different form;

3. I can severely edit down the overlapping elements in Book 2 and refer people who are mad enough to be interested to the more complete version in Book 1; or

4. I can give up entirely and spend the summer in the garden watching the cat sleep.

Option 4 is very attractive but I have promised myself that I will finish both books this year. The quickest way of achieving this is via Option 1.

I don't want to rip people off or mislead them but, on the other hand I would like to get these books finished and out of the way so I can get on with finishing the Thiepval book (and then the La Boisselle and the Fricourt/Mametz and finally the Montauban books). The problem is, as anyone mad enough to have read any of my previous doorstops will know, these books are not small. Book 1 is currently 700 pages long. The outline of Book 2 is c. 450 pages. There is, therefore, an enormous amount of re-writing to do for Book 2 if that is the decision.

I accept people might be a bit peeved if they unwittingly purchased both books only to find significant sections are identical. I can, of course, explain the reasons why in the blurb but this may not prove acceptable.

What does the team think, if anything? All suggestions, comments, advice welcome. That includes things to drink while watching the cat sleep.

Worried of West Wickham

[Martin Bennitt]

Offer a reduced price to those who have already bought Book 1 (and can prove it), or throw in a free picture of the cat sleeping.

Cheers Martin B

[paulgranger]

Simply an observation that there might be two sets of buyers out there, those interested from the British aspect, and those interested in the French side, and neither of these two sets of readers will necessarily buy both books, so the duplication of info may not be a problem. Cut and paste away. You'll need a Tiger beer while watching the cat sleep.

[John_Hartley]

Dear Worried

This is a tricky one. I've cut and pasted bits from my first two books into the just released third one. But they are only bits and I'm not really fussed if someone thinks "hey up, I've read that story somewhere before". I work to the advice given to me by Roni Wilkinson at Pen & Sword - that folk won't remember what you've written, but they will remember seeing a repeat of a photograph.

This is, of course, absolutely no help to you in deciding how to deal with so much overlap. I do remember a forum thread from some years back where folk had bought a newly released book, only to find it was actually a re-issue under a different title. My recollection is that they were, indeed, most unthrilled about what they felt was something of a rip-off. I therefore urge caution about a full scale "cut and paste". Perhaps there is a way of combining options 2 & 3. Scale it down somewhat but keep it reasonably comprehensive with elements of re-writing.

I am on much stronger ground with the cat watching. Nice cup of tea and a fruit scone. For a man of your advanced years, too much daytime alcohol will result in the cat watching you sleep.

Best Wishes

Uncle Harters.

[bmac]

John,

Sage advice as ever. Especially about the tea and fruit scone.

Peter Hart, in another place (as they say in the House of Commons when not yelling insults at one another), went for option 3. So, together with Paul and Martin's option 1 choices, this currently leaves me none the wiser (but far better informed). Tie break anyone (or tea break preferably)?

Bill

[seaJane]

For what it's worth, my solution would be this:

Admit up-front in each book that some of its substance has already appeared in the other, albeit in a different context (the more you can make that so, or show the same events from a different point of view, the better). So that people know before they buy.

And (optional) perhaps reduce the price of each book by a small amount - if you were planning to price the second book at unit minus 2 to cover the duplication, for example, price both at unit minus 1.

sJ

[trajan]

One (Book 1) is about the planning of the Battle of the Somme which, apart from an account as to how the British and French plans developed, also includes material about how pre-war tactical changes, training, equipment improvements (or not), etc., impacted on how these plans took shape. This one is 75% done. As you do, I am also working on a book (Book 2) about the attack of the French VIe Army on the Somme on 1.7.16. This necessarily includes a lot of the same information about the pre-war French Army and the development of the French plans as in the first book. ...

... Option 4 is very attractive but I have promised myself that I will finish both books this year. The quickest way of achieving this is via Option 1.

An honest opinion, as a published author of a major work on a niche subject (not on a GW topic, but face facts, the GW is also a nice topic!), 770 pages is well over the mark anyway. That's roughly 200,000 words long or so... My own major tome was only about 350 pages - and still people joked about door-stoppers!

I quite understand your predicament though - what to do with all the extra material that crept in when trying to focus on a particular subject. I won't go into what did NOT go into my Ph.D thesis... But. at a rough guess, each of my subsequent published articles (some using the rejected thesis material) are generally about 8-10,000 words, and at the publication stage are usually in their 10th-15th form, the other drafts having loads of 'relevant' material NOT relevant to the final product. I save these bits for future reference or use in another article...

So, my advice? Cut to the core with Book 1 - the looming battle, preparations on all sides. Then either a Book 2, the French perspective and a Book 3, the British, OR a Book 2 - the Battle...

Trajan

PS: From personal experience - the editing down for proper consumption is really the hardest part of all...

[bmac]

"200,000 words" ha! I passed that number long ago. 350,000 and counting. If you use 10 pt type it's amazing how much you can cram in on a page All three previous books have all been in excess of 300,000 words (650 pages plus). I have an unenviable reputation for absurd length and weight of book to keep up. Anything under 500 pages would be regarded as a lamentable failure on my part.

[chrrip]

Cut & paste away; bought both your books about Gommecourt - duplication did not deter me from doing so; am writing up my research on LRB PoWs & a mere 170000 words so far

cheers

Chris

[Bernard_Lewis]

Personally I'd go down the possibly painful route of writing the account of XYZ for book one then, after a gap, write it again for book two without referring back to what I wrote for book one. It will of necessity be similar but, hopefully, a little different.

Just my view, of course. Roni is a scallywag!!

Bernard

[Stoppage Drill]

Oh no ! Definitely no cutting and pasting !

Rewrite. Same basic material maybe, but in a different form of words.

If you get reviewed you will be crucified for c&p passages.

[MartH]

The standard procedure is to visit Reading Station.

[Fattyowls]

Bill

There is an option 5. You could put the band back together and hit the road, gets my vote.

I'm for option 3. I am very interested in a book on the French attacks, but would not necessarily get the planning book. A precis of the planning would be sufficient for me.

Pete.

[Moonraker]

Oh no ! Definitely no cutting and pasting !

Rewrite. Same basic material maybe, but in a different form of words.

If you get reviewed you will be crucified for c&p passages.

I agree. I had a minor problem in that my Wiltshire book had to include the First Canadian Contingent that then had its own book.

The standard procedure is to visit Reading Station.

Am I being a bit thick or too clever in assuming this refers to Lawrence of Arabia losing his first manuscript of Seven Pillars of Wisdom at Reading Station?

(Don't visit Reading Station over the weekend: most of it is closed for completion, hopefully, of the massive re-build.)

Moonraker

[hazelclark]

Oh no ! Definitely no cutting and pasting !

Rewrite. Same basic material maybe, but in a different form of words.

If you get reviewed you will be crucified for c&p passages.

I'm with you, but strictly as a reader. I had not realised that "cutting and pasting" was something that a good author would make use of. Went right off Martin Gilbert's Somme book because he quoted verbatim from his WW1 book. Just recently, I read two WW2 books by the same Author who had done the same and was thoroughly cheesed off.

Hazel

[bmac]

Pete,

Peter Hart supported Option 5 too. Hmmm. As to the planning book there is some hilarious stuff in it. I laughed. Honestly.

But option 3? You really want to make work for this don't you? On the whole.however. perhaps someone can explain to me the virtue of having precisely the same information written in the same order but with key words run through the thesaurus to make it appear different. I'm still not convinced I get it.

[MartH]

I agree. I had a minor problem in that my Wiltshire book had to include the First Canadian Contingent that then had its own book.

Am I being a bit thick or too clever in assuming this refers to Lawrence of Arabia losing his first manuscript of Seven Pillars of Wisdom at Reading Station?

(Don't visit Reading Station over the weekend: most of it is closed for completion, hopefully, of the massive re-build.)

Moonraker

Yes Text I, someone peel that man a grape.

[Ron Clifton]

Hello bmac

Another solution might be to edit down, quite severely, the information on the French in book one, and say in your introduction that the French side is to be covered in more detail in book two. The unedited text in book one can then be CUT and pasted into book two.

Good luck anyway.

Ron

[bmac]

Ron,

I think you have it. Why it didn't occur to me before is beyond me. So, yes, one book about how the British Army found itself on the Somme with reference to the Boer War forwards with marginal references to the French planning and issues about Maricourt/Montauban and another book about how the French changed after the Franco-Prussian war up to the end of the first few days fighting on the Somme with marginal references to the British esp. as it relates to planning issues with XIII Corps. A lot of cutting and pasting into two new separate files and a relatively small bit of re-writing the duplicated passages. I think it will work. Doh!

Right, off we go. It's Cutting and Pasting Friday (or Good Friday to some).

B

[Fattyowls]

Bill

It's a crazy plan but it just might work. Don't forget to do some backups of your files; you don't want to suffer the cyber equivalent of TEL and Reading Station.

Pete.

P.S. Will this give you enough time to sit in the garden drinking with the cat? Or even put the band back together? Give Manzanera a call right now and tell him to dig out the iconic sunglasses..........

[bmac]

Manzanera is probably too busy right now. He's playing the odd gig, overseeing a festival in Italy and later this year touring with David Gilmour. As to the cat, I can sit in the summer house (!?) and work whilst watching her snooze nearby. It's all good.

[SteveMarsdin]

Bill,

I think you've come to a wise conclusion and as Pete has said, some will be attracted to one book but not the other, because of the advertised scope.

Zuber covers some of the same ground about German Army training and organisation in his "Battle of the Ardennes" and "Mons Myth" books; it is necessary because they aren't a series of books but are orientated to two different markets.

[David Filsell]

Ron definitely has the answer I think eg Brit book and a French bock - not least I suspect the French book will attract a slightly different, perhaps, smaller audience

[bmac]

A 'smaller audience'? I've never written a book for the vertically challenged before. I shall have to ensure that 'Suitable for readers under 5 ft 6 in tall' is somewhere on the cover.

[Fattyowls]

I may have to lie about my height. I'm only an inch too tall so I might get away with it.......