Archive for

>Rational, Irrational, and Realistic

>
How often have you done something that left you wondering “what the farouk?” No, you don’t have to tell me about it. I probably don’t want to know. But if you’re human, you’ve probably done a fair few things that seemed like a good idea at the time but made no sense, were downright stupid, and in extreme cases, should have got you into a lot of trouble or possibly dead.

Now, how many of those things have been the kind of thing that you couldn’t put into fiction because no-one would believe it?

If you’re anything like me, the answer is “most of them”, and the reason is kinda sorta with a bit of a squint related to Sarah’s post yesterday (Yeah. Blame Sarah. She’s fine with it).

The short version is, we’re wired for narrative – and wired at levels so deep we don’t understand them. Something happens, and we’re immediately putting some kind of story to it, whether it’s that the driver who cut us off is in a hurry, the lottery association finds out your numbers and deliberately refuses to draw them (okay, that one’s a joke – although there’s probably someone who believes it, somewhere), that lightning strike that fried your hard drive was punishment for you not taking backups…

Of course, we’re fitting the story retrospectively, so we can make it look neat and pick our options – rather like the joke about the bad golfer whose first tee off landed him in a patch of buttercups, where an angry spirit made it impossible for him to enjoy butter for a month. His next tee off he hit the pussy willow…

The thing is, when you look at it from the front end, you’ve got a ball going in a particular direction at a particular speed. It’s going to hit something in a relatively defined area – but there’s no way to tell exactly what because there are too many variables in play. So, it’s got no less chance of hitting that single buttercup in the middle of the green than it has of hitting the blade of grass next door – so even though it looks like something special when the ball hits the buttercup, it actually isn’t.

But unless you set it up as something special, you can’t write the ball and the buttercup (oh dear… this is getting… low), because while we accept, sort of, that in life shit happens for no obvious reason, in stories it’s got to have a reason. In a story, the ball has to hit that buttercup because of divine intervention, or because the golfer is insanely skilled, or even – demonstrating that human narrativium bears no relation to causality – because someone has a huge bet on the ball hitting the buttercup.

In fact, if ball meets buttercup at the end, and the hero has the bet, you have a narrative guarantee it will hit. If the antagonist is the one standing to win – especially from the hero – the ball won’t hit. Narrativium rules are – as Pratchett wisely observed – so strongly wired we’re disappointed when they don’t happen in real life.

And what, you ask (okay, no you don’t, but damn it, I’m writing this post so I get to make the rules) does this has to do with me?

Simple. If you fit your stories to the rules of narrativium, they’ll seem realistic when they’re not. If you write what life is actually like, it will seem utterly unrealistic, silly, and boring. Even when it shouldn’t be (because let’s face it, 90% of real life is the mundane stuff we’d rather not be doing).

So fire up the narrativium engines, Scotty, and pick a recent-ish bizarre event, then weave the story that makes it make sense. Just please, nothing that makes me want to claw my eyes out in self defense.

>Telling Fortunes

>
Cross my palm with silver. More silver. Um… let’s try platinum.

Oh, there it is, I see now. The future is coming into focus: Any of you who really want to be successful at writing and who are willing to fight enough for it, will make it. Oh, there will be setbacks. There will be blows of fate. And, yes, you’ll make mistakes (probably many) but you will eventually make it. If you live long enough. And if there is still a publishing industry.

Why all the weasel words? Because there is no fate. It is all in your hands.

I’ve told everyone I’ve mentored that writing is one of the most “superstition inducing” professions there is, because so little is in our hands. So, if you’re one of my fledgelings, right about now you’re scratching your head and going “Sarah, you have, as they say, zee issues.”

Yes. Comes with the territory. But what I’ve said isn’t necessarily contradictory.

Let me explain. Yesterday I caught myself thinking “If only I could have gone back and told my idiot twenty something year old self that I would eventually get published. How much anguish I’d have saved.” And then I stopped, because what I’d just thought smacks of fatalism, of resignation, of a pre-scripted future. For just a moment, I was in that place where I was born to be or do something; where I would have become that regardless.

I won’t go into why this view – regardless of what some scientists think – must be wrong. The short of it is that it would require the belief in an all-controlling (and dumb) divinity. Any scientific theory that requires Deus ex Machina, isn’t. No, not particularly going to argue it. Not here. There will be a blog on this in the future but not here.

Instead, I’ll go into why it’s so prevalent in writers’ (and other artists’) minds. First, it’s because most of us are in the grip of a compulsion. Surely we can’t want to do this so much if it’s wrong. Second, it’s because it absolves us from our failures.

Heaven knows that half the time in this field, the failures really aren’t our fault. As Dave has mentioned several times, you can’t attribute every crash to drivers’ error. There are a lot of factors influencing this unstable situation. That, of course, is the other end of it. Sometimes, no mater how hard you fight, you are doomed. And in retrospect, it seems inevitable.

The thing is that writing is not “all your money behind one horse.” Oh, sure, if you only ever write one novel, and it can’t succeed for whatever reason, you will fail. The question is “Why do you only write a novel?” “How much can you want to make it, if you only write one novel?” Yeah, it might be the best novel in the whole dang world. It still won’t make it, if it’s something no one wants to read/publish right then. You keep on trying and you’re not being defeated by fate. You’re being defeated by you.

Take it from me – you will make it as far as as you want to make it, dependent on how hard you’re willing to work.

This comes prettily from an almost unlimitedly ambitious writer who isn’t even a NYT bestseller yet, doesn’t it? Sure does. Because it’s doable. Eventually. If I live long enough. And there have been times along the way when the world not only wasn’t my oyster – it wasn’t even my kumquat with mustard on the side. That I haven’t got there yet is a function of “How hard I’m willing to try.” In my case, two factors have forced me to take – shall we say? – the scenic route: a) the one thing I will not sacrifice to writing is my boys’ future. This means times when I should have pushed hard were “wasted” shepherding them through childish issues and teen angst. (Not their fault. I signed up for it. Glad I did it too.) b) I don’t work as hard at self promoting as 99% of authors. This will have to change. I know it will have to change. But it goes against a basic part of my personality (yes, the lazy part, smarty. True to an extent. Writing is far more of a pleasure than promoting, so I write more than I promote.) and those can take time to defeat. It can be done, it’s just takes a long time.

Are you really whining “but what if I don’t have enough talent?” Right. Because that’s the operational quality. You sit down, you breathe deep and writing flows from your fingertips IF you have the magical thing “talent.” Look… I won’t deny there’s such a thing as “talent.” I.e. by inclination and character, you do some things more easily. For me, that’s characters. But to compensate, I’ve fought EVERY inch of the way for plot and I don’t flatter myself I’m any better than “solid midlist” on THAT (Except for the last submitted book, Sword and Blood.) I don’t know anyone – not a single professionally published author – who is naturally good at the many parts that make a successful novel. Besides, come on, so far as there’s talent and you can discern it, read the bestseller list. You’ll come across at least two at any given time who have NO discernable talent. But they made it. Now, yeah, maybe they were golden children, raised up by fate with no struggle. However, my guess is if it looks that way, they’re REALLY good liars.

So, this is the bad news: you’re not fated to be a massive bestseller. These are the good news: You’re not fated to be ANYTHING. The future is wide open and even if at times it looks like the south end of a northbound donkey, it is open to change.

And now, like any good fortune teller I want you to open up so I can advise you (Only if you answer me, I suspect you can advise you after 😉 ): What are your fears? What do you think can block you forever? What are your limiting factors? What will you not sacrifice to your writing, no matter what? What is your special talent? What do you know you suck at? How do you plan to get better at that? AND – for fun – what is your ridiculous superstition which you know is nonsense but makes you feel “safer” as you’re on your way? (My own security blanket in this area is that if I eat at Pete’s Kitchen in Denver, I sell something. Might be a short story, mind. Or Japanese rights. But I sell something. So far, so good.)

>Characterisation

>
I came across this, Michael Hauge’s take on characterisation which he pins down as Identity and Essence. (Skim down the liked page to find it).

‘He says:

IDENTITY is the role that the protagonist adopts in life. It is donned as a form of armour, a protection against the vagaries of life, and is essentially the cicatrix that has grown over their deep life-wound.

ESSENCE is the protagonist’s potential. It is who your character is when stripped of their protective armour. It is who they are when they have finally overcome their inner battles, their resistance to their true calling, their destined relationship…etc.’

According to Hauge the character arc that your protagonist travels goes from living in their identity to living up to their essence. I guess you could say that they have to be true to themselves.

Often in stories a character starts out wanting one thing, only to discover halfway through that what they thought they wanted, they don’t really want, they want something else. My favourite stories are ones where the character grows.

Hauge’s Identity/Essence is a variation on what I tell my students. I tell them to see if they can encapsulate their character in two conflicting words. eg. Faithless-priest or Cynical-romantic.

Once you do this, it helps you identify the character’s inner conflict and gives you an insight into where you can take them during the course of the story.

I like plots that are character driven. It is because the protagonist is who they are, that they react the way they do. They aren’t an ‘everyman’, like the wooden man in the picture. Someone spoke up in class today, saying they didn’t like Frodo as a character in Lord of the Rings because they felt he was too bland.

I said, he was an ‘everyman’. He had a role to fulfil as the hero of the story. He was an ordinary person, doing extraordinary things. Maybe heroic fantasy is not a good genre to examine for characterisation, as the events tend to be larger than life.

Hauge’s concept of Identity and Essence are a bit like the Johari Window. The idea is that you are made up of four selves.

There is what you know about yourself and others know.
There is what you know about yourself but keep hidden from others.
There is what is known to others, but you are blind to (eg personality flaws)
And there is what is not known to others and not known to you.

OR …

There is what you (the writer) know about the character and the readers know about them.
There is what you the writer know about the character and what the character knows about themselves.
There is what you the writer know about the character and what the reader knows (but the character is blind to).
And there is what you know about the character and no one else knows (what you plan to do with the character).

All of this is interesting and might help trigger ways for writers to tackle creating characters, or exploring the characters they have created. Has it triggered any thoughts for you?

>E-books again

>This is probably going to be a fairly short post, as Dr Biren — our Island GP — has just done a house-call to check that I’m behaving myself. Which I suspect doesn’t include sitting here and typing. I won’t tell if you don’t. My sense of humor is just a little less present than usual. Tickle yourself for the obligatory chuckle.

I’ve just read my first book on an e-reader. As you all know I am an enthusiastic supporter of e-books. I’ve read on screen for many years now… and never really figured why people found it awkward or difficult.

I think I understand now.

Barbara loves the e-reader, and has always struggled to read on a computer screen. The difference between us is quite simple. B is a relatively fast reader, and can perhaps finish a book in a 4-6 hour sitting. I am a very fast reader. A normal 400 page novel will take me 2 hours or less. I’ll persevere, but honestly the e-reader was not very pleasant, because there is relatively little text to a page, and I was changing pages every 8 seconds, which I found an irritation. So: as e-readers are intended for overconsumers (and I am an extreme example, I grant) for me they’d need a very much bigger screen.

Which brings me to ask: are there different formats (not fonts or line spaces, but structural format) and requirements for ideally presenting a story to e-book consumers that are different to the requirements of a paper-book?

I suspect ideally e-books need to be shorter, and possibly more modular. Eric Flint is a good eg. of an excellent modular writer. Although his books fit together well as units, they’re made up of a sequence of modules, each of which stands on its own to some extent, and one can take out and replace with slightly different scene, ending in more or less the same point, without damaging the overall story line. I am not a good modular writer, as there is a lot more interweave and foreshadowing in my work (I am not a pantster, I know where a book is going and build toward that) – with the book being the smallest unit. This means I am a lot harder to read — as people often do read with e-readers — in snatches.

I’m also of the opinion that the current length of books is more to do with economics than ideal reads. A book after all is as long as it needs to be. There is usually a relationship between the number of major characters and its length (this differs from writer to writer as some writers devolop characters more and some of us are more wordy than others.) A short story is very difficult setting to adequately develop a complex set of characters or a complex story line or world-building. Of course some authors do this, it’s just hard. This is why I believe that writing shorts (even if you can’t sell them) is the best possible training for writers.
But I believe there is a market and space for the Novella and Novelette again, especially if priced appropriately. Of course we are now in a situation where cover art becomes a serious part of the cost.

Your thoughts?

And BTW don’t forget to check out http://www.nakedreader.com/ – they have some great books and stories. Some even free – if you look in at the right time.

>Sunday Morning Round-up

>I have to start by telling Dave he owes me a keyboard. Not only did I spew coffee all over it when I saw the pictures of poor bald Roly with his ugg boots, but Rocky (my rocks for brains but very loving collie mix) tried to jump into the laptop to see his new friend. For those of you who haven’t seen the before and after hair cut pics of Roly, check them out here.

This weekend has been a busy one between Sarah’s writers workshop and the author event last night at the library. I feel like the walking dead this morning and my brain still hasn’t kicked in even though coffee has flowed in copious amounts into my body. So, that witty yet deep post I know I would have done is still imprisoned somewhere deep in my brain. Instead of trying to pull it out kicking and screaming, I thought I’d throw out some links of interest and see what sort of comments they stir up.

For those following the soap opera in the boardroom at Barnes & Noble, the New York Times has this article detailing the fight. It’s a good article on the motives — or potential motives — of the parties involved. The question here is, do you believe Burkle is in a shadow fight to take over the B&N board or not? More than that, if there is a change in the board, is it too little too late?

One of the best pieces of advice I’ve seen in the blogs in a long time comes from agent Kristen Nelson. In her blog, she recounts how, at a recent conference, she recounted the stats on how many queries they get, how many sample pages they request and from that how many clients they actually sign. It is, in her own words, “daunting” for new writers to hear these stats. But her advice is unique and something I agree with whole-heartedly:

Then I tell them to cover their ears and say, “la, la, la I’m not listening” because what it boils down to is that these stats should be white noise to you aspiring writers. You can hear it, but it’s in the background. Know the stats so you have a keen understanding of the reality behind the business of publishing but then don’t let it stop you.

If you love writing, if you are passionate about it as your dream, then you are going to write no matter what. Publication is one possible end result but whether that happens are not should not be the only determiner of why you write. You write because you have to. It’s like breathing. Absolutely necessary.

Besides, you never know when toughness and persistence will finally pay off so don’t lose sight of that!

On the e-book front, the Association of American Publishers has posted the sales figures for July

The Adult Hardcover category was down 15.2 percent in July with sales of $74.1 million, although sales for the year-to-date are up by 10.2 percent. Adult Paperback sales decreased 10.1 percent for the month ($111.1 million) but increased by 8.6 percent for the year. Adult Mass Market sales decreased 11.0 percent for July with sales totaling $60.6 million; sales were down by 13.1 percent year to date.”

E-book sales continue to grow, with a 150.2 percent increase over July 2009 ($40.8 million); year-to-date E-book sales are up 191.0 percent.

Does anyone else see a trend here?

Finally, Laini Taylor has a great post about writers needing cheerleaders. She comments that, ” Before editing. Before almost anything else but snack-making, we need to be convinced and reminded that we are GOOD.” Check out her post and see if you agree.

So, what are your thoughts? Do you pay attention to agent and publisher stats? Do you have a cheerleader and how important is it that you have someone who pushes and prod and cheers as needed? And what about B&N, bookstores in general and e-books? The floor is now yours.

>Do I Have to Write?

>Our guest blogger today is Ellie Ferguson. Ellie’s novel, Wedding Bell Blues, is published by Naked Reader Press and is available from the N.R. site and Amazon. Let’s give her a big welcome and make her feel at home. — Amanda

Earlier this week, I did a blog over at The Naked Truth, Naked Reader’s blog where I asked — okay, I’ll admit it. I whined a bit — “Do I have to?”. I whined because Amanda and Cliff, NR’s acquisitions editor, wanted me to post a little about myself and Wedding Bell Blues. I’d never done a blog before and really wasn’t sure what I ought to say. Next thing I knew, not only was I blogging there but here as well. I’m no longer whining, except when my coffee cup is empty and the chocolate is gone. But, from what I can tell, that’s the general response of most writers face with such a predicament.

Okay, who am I and why am I here? As it says on the book cover — gee, I never really thought I could say that. And isn’t it a great cover? Laura Givens did a wonderful job and I can’t thank her enough — my name’s Ellie Ferguson. As I said at The Naked Truth, I’m older than 20 and younger than death and that’s all you’ll get from me about my age. After all, it’s not polite to ask a woman how old she is. I’m a mother, a daughter and was a wife. I’ve spent most of my life in the South and love to travel. The only problem with that is my dog always thinks I’ve abandoned him when I do and it takes weeks to reassure the poor thing and my cat resents the fact I came back before he could figure out a way to kill the dog and hide the body. My house is haunted — it is, really. I swear it. What else explains the table that plays music and the light that comes on by itself? — but it’s mine and I love it. Okay, I’m a little strange. But that makes life interesting.

Wedding Bell Blues is my first published novel. Like most writers, I have a number of others that I probably should burn for fear that, after I’m gone, someone might find them and see that I spent a lot of time writing bad fanfic as I learned how to be a writer. And that brings me to the topic today.

Do I have to write? I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard that question — and often from myself. Sometimes the question comes from family or friends who just don’t understand what it is to be a writer. They shake their heads and you can see them thinking, “Poor Ellie. Her head’s always in the clouds. Such a shame she can’t be like the rest of the family.” Then there is my favorite variation on it, “Poor Ellie, such a shame she’ll never be as good as [insert author’s name here].”

What they don’t understand is that, yes, I do have to write. Writing is as much a part of me as my graying hair and need for coffee every morning. I can’t not do it. The hard part is screwing up the confidence to actually send out something I’ve spent so much time writing. Then the wait. Will the editor like it? Will they buy it? What if they buy it but want me to make all sorts of changes? What if my father sees what I’ve written — oh, wait, it’s not THAT kind of book. Whew.

Then the call comes saying the editor liked the book and wants to publish it. My shout of joy can still be heard — echoing somewhere around the Himalayas by now. That was one of the best moments of my life. Someone not only liked what I had written but wanted to pay me money for it and put it out where others could read it. Others…gulp…people would actually read it. Was there anything in it I didn’t want them to read? What was in it? Why couldn’t I remember what I’d written?

Fortunately, Cliff managed to talk me down from the sudden burst of fear that no one would like my book. Now I only break into the shakes once every couple of hours. After all, I’m an writer. I can say that now. I have a great cover with my name on it. I can point people to sites where they can buy my book. No need to hyperventilate. No time to…after all, I have to write. Not for Cliff. Not even for Naked Reader. No, I have to write for me. Writing is a part of me and I have more stories to tell. As I work on my next novel, there is only one question I can’t answer and it is the question all writers — if they’re honest — fear: will the readers like my book?

All I can say is I hope so. Wedding Bell Blues is one of those books that had to be written. It came to me while on vacation and wouldn’t let me go. I had fun writing it and I love the characters. Hopefully, Cliff will let me play with them some more later. In the meantime, I’ll continue to write because I can’t not do it.

Hello, my name’s Ellie and I’m a writer. It’s almost 7 in the morning and I’ve written a blog and 1,000 words on my current wip. Who drank all my coffee?

So, how about you guys? Do you have to write? Or am I the only one who has the strange, often demanding, compulsion?

>Emotional Resonance

> Emotional resonance seems a very subjective term to me. Like so many of the phrases you might see on a rejection slip. “Your characters lack emotional resonance”. But what does it mean?

Resonance. Well the Free Dictionary gives a few definitions, I guess the most relevant might be: Richness or significance, especially in evoking an association or strong emotion.

If I am guessing correctly – and honestly I don’t even know if the people who use this term really define it, even for themselves – emotional resonance is about evoking within the reader the emotions you are trying to portray in the work. If a character is said to lack emotional resonance, then my understanding is something along the lines that this character does not evoke an emotion in the reader.

Now I am pretty sure that this term is also used when people object to a character, and also when the reader does not buy the reactions that a character might have – you might say when the suspension of disbelief is broken. This seems to be a different issue, but it gets lumped into the same basket.

Of course, beyond the definition and what exactly people are trying to say is the reason for the lack of emotional resonance. The characterisation may just be poorly thought out or executed, or perhaps there is a lack of consistency that is jarring. Perhaps the emotional reactions of the character do not gel in some situations, and this breaks the reader-writer connection.

Even though all of this could be true, I think more often than not the reason is that the reader (or editor is they happen to be one), just don’t like that character. They don’t ‘get’ them. The things that particular character experience and strive for, their emotional reactions, do not echo with any level of personal experience in the reader. If that is the case, then no amount of crafting will make that reader like the work – no matter how good the characterisation or how relevant it is to the story.

I don’t know. Help me out. What do people mean by ’emotional resonance’?