Back to Excerpts Page    Current Contest

Judges' Report on the Third First Chapter and Synopsis Competition.

(Reasons on specific placements and common problems are at the bottom of this page.)

Standard of Entries.

The standard of entries was impressive, and sorting out the winners was both time-consuming and very difficult. Four judges were involved in the decision after it became obvious that the work was too much for one, and that personal taste was going to make objectivity difficult. One judge read all the entries, the others read several each, according to their preferred genres.  Each of the top fifteen entries was read by at least two judges, and some were read by all four. Three of the judges read "blind" copies of the entries with no author's name appended. Several of the entries, including the short list and a good handful of others, were of such quality that I wouldn't have been surprised to read them as published books.

Judging Guidelines.

Entries were judged on the following guidelines.

*Readability.  This is difficult to define, but we all know it when we meet it. Natural storytellers can involve and entice readers (even those who mightn't normally choose a specific genre) to read on, and the professional touch is obvious in a surefootedness that lets the reader relax and go along for the ride. The short listed entries had to appeal even to judges who didn't prefer that specific genre.

*Writing style. There were some fine stylists among entrants, and at least two were considered flawless. There was some beautiful descriptive writing and some clever use of irony and humour. The short listed entries have very different styles, but all were pleasing, and none seemed to be trying too hard for effect. 

*Plot construction. This is difficult to judge from one chapter, which is why the synopses were included in the competition. Note. First Chapter contests are disproportionately hard on some mss. Some action-packed stories begin with a quiet first chapter, other modern day stories begin with a prologue or first chapter set years before the main story. The compulsory synopsis helps show the missing aspects, but still – there are stories that would do better in whole-ms competitions. This was noted on some of the individual assessments.

 *Character presentation. The top entries were all very strong in this department. In a few pages, and sometimes in just a few lines, memorable characters were created and particularised. Other entries were equally strong in this department, and this has been noted in their assessments.

*Grammar and construction. One of the judges was a magazine editor for several years, and is tireless at hunting down infelicities and redundancies. These have been duly pointed out - even in short listed entries. 

*Originality and/or a fresh approach within genre confines. This is very difficult, since some genres have tight "givens".

*Whether the entry engaged the readers' attention and/or emotion. This is somewhat subjective, which is where the different judges came in useful.

Genres of Entries

The entries included straight romances, romantic suspense, mystery, family, adventure, thriller, science fiction, "straight" novels, parody, fantasy, historical, heist and psycho-biography. To make fair, unbiased comparison of  manuscripts from so many different genres is almost impossible, so entries were judged as follows. We asked ourselves two major questions. How good a book is this of its type? and Would I buy this book? On the whole, chapters that begin in an accessible manner rather than by using a "trick" beginning perform best in this kind of competition. Had entire mss been under consideration, (as mentioned above in the note) the results might have been different.

Darrel, Sandy and Anne, the three judges who read unnamed entries, each had a strong favourite, which Sally, your exhausted organiser and assessor, liked very much as well. That's why there are three first prizes. The second prize winner was liked very much by three judges, and the next two runners-up scored next highest in the assessments.

There were at least a dozen entries that could have been winners with other judges or with different competitors, or in full-ms competitions, and it was this high proportion of quality offerings that made the job so difficult. Each entrant is sent an individual assessment, as per the rules of the contest.

Comments on Short List

"Aresh" by Denise Norton, is a winner for its delightful central character, pristine writing style, and clever depiction of a fantasy society. Reads like - Diana Wynne Jones. 

 "Mara's Flame" by Hamish Clark, is a winner for another charmer of a protagonist, pungent characters and dialogue and some unexpectedly lyrical descriptions. Reads like - a modern-type E. Nesbit. 

 "Security Hazard", by Denise Norton, is a winner for immediately likable protagonists, impeccable pace and a bright style, and for a freshness that transcended the tight romance genre. Reads like - Jo Bannister in a cheerful mood, setting a book in the USA.  

BelleMere - by Angela Somerset, is a worthy second for its strong sense of place and lovely, self-assured style. This author can draw characters in a few sharp strokes. Reads like - Mary Stewart.

"Maxine " by John Lowe was well liked for its psychedelic but accessible style, its sense of time and place, and the depiction of its hapless protagonist. Reads like - Clive James. 

"Take that Woman" by Sylvia Alston, has a strongly Australian style, and clever characterisation. This author can draw the unacceptable in a manner that shows why people might accept it. Reads like - a likable version of Colleen McCullough's Australian-set work.

What Went Against Some Entries.

I won't comment on specific entries, but here are problems that kept some otherwise excellent runners out of the short list.

Writing Style. Some styles are technically good, but strive too hard for effect. Others have been poorly proofed, and contain sentences that don't make sense. Some are by people from one country trying to write in a style that hails from overseas. This is possible (two entrants succeeded wonderfully), but often the result sounds forced and unnatural. Clumsy sentence structure plagued some entries. 

First Chapter Blues. As mentioned before, some first chapters just don't reflect the bulk of the ms.

Lack of Reader Identification. Lack of reader identification can happen for many reasons. Sometimes books are set in an unfamiliar world, society, or culture, and too much is left unexplained because the author knows it and assumes the readers will, too. In other cases, too much is explained, which slows down the action. Two of the winners leapt these barriers with a casual flick of the heels.

Character Problems. These are various, too. In some cases supposedly "good" characters are not likable, or just don't connect with the readers because their concerns are too self-centred or too one-sided, or even too "foreign". In other cases, apparently "good" characters do apparently "bad" things for no good reason. A reason might become apparent later in the novel, but first chapters are judged as is. In yet other cases (including otherwise strong contenders), characters were almost interchangeable or difficult to picture.   

Pace. Slow pace is a problem for some mss. This could reflect the fact that the books are long ones, and so develop in a leisurely manner, but these first chapters are read without the benefit of the rest of the work.

Format. Three otherwise excellent mss suffered from their formats. All three were based on fact, which makes it difficult to avoid this problem. In one case, the first chapter provided factual background for the rest of the book, which would have been different stylistically.

Timelining. A few chapters had timeline problems, with too many flashbacks and odd transitions.

Back to Excerpts Page   How to Enter the Current Contest