This weekend, I attended a lecture given by a director/scenic designer. As someone who spends a fair amount of time working on theater, I found it a very interesting discussion. One thing that really struck me was the extent to which the designer relied on visual stimuli. He poured over thousands of visuals until he found the ones that spoke to him. That's where he drew most of his inspiration from.
This took me somewhat by surprise. In hindsight, I guess it shouldn't have. Theater really is a very visual medium. Except, when I do it, I still don't approach it in that sort of visual way. I make spreadsheets and checklists. Maybe that's just me. I often prefer words to just a picture. Or music. I've mentioned before here how I like that for inspiration. I've just never thought of myself as highly visual.
Which was why I was surprised by how much I like Pinterset. It's a website where you can set up boards, like cork boards, and collect on them images that you like, that interest you, that inspire you. I heard about it ages ago, but I only got one recently after all of my friends proved to me how awesome it is. I must say, they had a point.
Pinterest is a great tool for people who like visual inspiration or even those who just like looking at pretty things. It's a great site, and I'd highly recommend it.
For more on getting the most out of Pinterest, I'd suggest reading Rachel Gardner's thoughts on the subject.
How do you feel about Pinterest? Do you enjoy visual stimuli?
Showing posts with label linkage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label linkage. Show all posts
Monday, March 5, 2012
Monday, January 9, 2012
They're All Gonna Die
I recently read a certain book series that shall remain nameless, because spoilers are evil, but suffice it to say it was one of those series where people die all the freaking time, and not just Red Shirts either. And, honestly, I didn't feel too bad for most of the characters who died. It was just the nature of the beast. It was just one of those things where the author says, "Here's a passel of folks. They're all gonna die. Let's go."
In the end, the characters basically shook out into a certain break-down.
In the end, the characters basically shook out into a certain break-down.
- 33% = The Ultimate Red-Shirts.
No one cares about about these people at all, so when the writer bumps them off, people shrug and move on.
- 33% = Bad Guys
These are the folks you aren't supposed to like. So, really, when someone -- the narrator, a character, whoever -- bumps them off, you kind of applaud. And, let's face it, you don't feel sad at all. - 33% = Good guys
When these people die, we all feel sad. Even if you know it's coming, that you the writer intends to kill him/her eventually, you're kind of hoping that isn't going to happen, that they'll find some way around his/her own rules and will keep that one.
The other 1% is the MC(s), who assumably, because you're reading a series, the writer has to keep around for the later books. It's functionally Contractual Immortality with a splash of Plot Armor.
Eventually, though, I'm just gonna say it, all that dying gets old. It's not that I have an inherent aversion to the death that some books just plain have to have. It's just that eventually that the time came that I felt like the writer was bumping off characters just to bump of characters. There came a point when I thought the writer was killing characters, and I'm included characters people liked who did not for any real reason have to die, just to prove that he or she could.
To me, it just looks like the writer was trying to shore up his or her Anyone Can Die cred. I get it, Anyone Can Die is a nice thought, because it establishes real world values in the text, exempting characters from MC Superpowers that annoy people, it maintains tension in the story but keeping stakes high, and it increases the motivations of any character who survives the death of someone they knew. But there's a line between Keeping It Real and Being Downright Arbitrary, and an overuse of the Anyone Can Die rule seems to be arbitrary and almost trying too hard.
I'm not going to lie, sometimes I worry I give my characters a little too much Plot Armor. I've bumped off characters before, but only because I thought it benefited the story and the plot. Once upon a time a character appeared in my head and one of the first things I knew about him -- lovely guy, great character -- was that he died in the middle. But I only knew he had to die, because the story would not have worked if he'd lived. Sometimes characters just have to die.
Sometimes they have to die. But they don't all have to die.
How do you feel about character's dying? How do you feel about killing characters? Do you do that a lot? How do you feel about writers who kill off a lot of characters?
Friday, August 5, 2011
Isn't It Ironic, Don't You Think?
Just the other day, I was watching a video in which someone explained that he uses the word gay to mean stupid because he is "an ironic liberal." I am not linking anyone to this video, as the arguments it contained were ridiculous (not gay -- ironically or otherwise -- because arguments are not attracted to other arguments of any sort or gender, assuming that arguments even have genders, which I doubt).
Let's clear a few things up:
1) Irony is "the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning." Thus, using gay as stupid would imply that the concepts of homosexuality and intelligence were in any way related. This is incredibly untrue. Thus, there is no capacity for the use of the term gay to mean stupid and achieve irony. I would say sorry,but it would have to be ironically, because I in no way apologize for the meaning of these words.
2) As the word gay refers either to homosexuality or happiness (setting aside all overlaps thereof which would be puns and not ironic), the only way to achieve irony using this word would be to use it to refer to things that were either heterosexual or sad (including any overlaps thereof, which would not be puns or ironic). Thus, if I referred to two heterosexuals of the opposite gender kissing as gay, that might be construed as ironic, but more likely we would consider that annoying and ridiculous, and I'd look like a prat.
Ironic does not refer to things that are frustrating, accidentally offensive, or just don't make any sense. I'm sorry, that catchall, quick fix only works on people who don't know what the word means. I'd like to think most of us do.
Remember the song "Ironic" by Alanis Morisette? (Which I will link to, because it's a nice song.) Of course, the real irony of that song is how much of the song is not really ironic. But we know that now.
So, please, people of the internet, stop misusing the word ironic or assuming it's a quick cover for being a prat. You're damaging the English language, misinforming people about the meaning of words, and frustrating the people who know what that word actually means. And because you're making a fool of yourself. There's that too.
Are you a fan of irony?
Let's clear a few things up:
1) Irony is "the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning." Thus, using gay as stupid would imply that the concepts of homosexuality and intelligence were in any way related. This is incredibly untrue. Thus, there is no capacity for the use of the term gay to mean stupid and achieve irony. I would say sorry,but it would have to be ironically, because I in no way apologize for the meaning of these words.
2) As the word gay refers either to homosexuality or happiness (setting aside all overlaps thereof which would be puns and not ironic), the only way to achieve irony using this word would be to use it to refer to things that were either heterosexual or sad (including any overlaps thereof, which would not be puns or ironic). Thus, if I referred to two heterosexuals of the opposite gender kissing as gay, that might be construed as ironic, but more likely we would consider that annoying and ridiculous, and I'd look like a prat.
Ironic does not refer to things that are frustrating, accidentally offensive, or just don't make any sense. I'm sorry, that catchall, quick fix only works on people who don't know what the word means. I'd like to think most of us do.
Remember the song "Ironic" by Alanis Morisette? (Which I will link to, because it's a nice song.) Of course, the real irony of that song is how much of the song is not really ironic. But we know that now.
So, please, people of the internet, stop misusing the word ironic or assuming it's a quick cover for being a prat. You're damaging the English language, misinforming people about the meaning of words, and frustrating the people who know what that word actually means. And because you're making a fool of yourself. There's that too.
Are you a fan of irony?
Monday, May 23, 2011
Just a Bit Too Easy
We've heard me gripe in the past about Easy Button Endings, where everything gets wrapped up a little too quickly and cleanly for things to quite make sense.
But, up there with Easy Button Endings might just be Easy Button Openers. How you open up a book, plot arch, or character is important. And, if you don't put the effort into opening them properly, there's going to be a sense on the part of the reader that it was rushed and doesn't quite fit.
Have you ever seen a movie where the villain walks in, kicks a puppy, and then insults his own mother? No, because that would be like hanging a giant, glowing sign above his head announcing I AM THE BAD GUY. But, you know, I've seen some openers that come pretty close. I've seen movies where one of the first things you see the new villain do is shoot some pretty, young thing dead for little reason, and then the camera stays on that so you can remember that he's not a nice guy. To my mind, not subtle.
We like subtlety. We like nuance. It makes characters more interesting and believable. It gives people a chance to find something to love in the villain so that they can feel more like they're reading about real people instead of a cardboard cut-out of a bad guy.
Writing a good opening is hard. Just like all good writing is hard. But we owe it to readers to figure out how to tell the story right. We owe it to our characters. We owe it to ourselves. Because it's worth it.
Ever seen any openers that made you want to drop the book and run? Any that you thought were just so incredibly awesome? How's your writing going?
But, up there with Easy Button Endings might just be Easy Button Openers. How you open up a book, plot arch, or character is important. And, if you don't put the effort into opening them properly, there's going to be a sense on the part of the reader that it was rushed and doesn't quite fit.
Have you ever seen a movie where the villain walks in, kicks a puppy, and then insults his own mother? No, because that would be like hanging a giant, glowing sign above his head announcing I AM THE BAD GUY. But, you know, I've seen some openers that come pretty close. I've seen movies where one of the first things you see the new villain do is shoot some pretty, young thing dead for little reason, and then the camera stays on that so you can remember that he's not a nice guy. To my mind, not subtle.
We like subtlety. We like nuance. It makes characters more interesting and believable. It gives people a chance to find something to love in the villain so that they can feel more like they're reading about real people instead of a cardboard cut-out of a bad guy.
Writing a good opening is hard. Just like all good writing is hard. But we owe it to readers to figure out how to tell the story right. We owe it to our characters. We owe it to ourselves. Because it's worth it.
Ever seen any openers that made you want to drop the book and run? Any that you thought were just so incredibly awesome? How's your writing going?
Monday, January 17, 2011
Kids Are Different
(WARNING: Long post. For abbreviated version, skip down to the paragraph starting with the words "Okay, now that I've gone on.")
Recently, through the power of Netflix streaming, I rewatched the movie Quest for Camelot, which a voice in the back of my mind reminded me I'd once seen at a friends house at least a decade ago. Having rewatched it, I decided that aside from two nice songs, it's only got two real strong points (note: the point of this post is, actually, not to knock the movie).
Firstly, I felt that Warner Bros.'s inclusion a disabled character was, at one point, a step towards acknowledging that there are disabled people in America and saying, "Yes, even disabled people can help save their kingdom from evil." For once, we see a film breaking out of the more common Disney paradigm that the world can only be saved by ridiculously good looking, perfectly abled people (who often have bonus powers from somewhere).
Secondly, Garrett now faced some difficulties the other characters didn't (such as having to flee from a dragon -- which he couldn't see -- by jumping on rocks -- which he couldn't see -- across a pit of lava -- which he couldn't see. Thank goodness for assist birds). This made his struggles as a character all the more engaging. To be blunt,in terms of the story, it rather raised the ante on everything that he had to do. He had a harder time than the female lead, because she could see what she needed to do. Also, his experiences gave him the skills he needs to help save the kingdom. Helpful, that.
Thirdly, his experience of how he'd been treated when he lost his sight shaped his view of himself, her family, and their homeland. These factors all went into the motivations that moved him through the story and escalated the conflict. Garrett manages to both make strong points as to why he shouldn't be defined by his blindness and simultaneously define himself by it. (Oh, character angst.)
Okay, now that I've gone on and on about why Garret is definitely my favorite part of that movie, I'll circle back to my thesis. Namely, the rarity of disabled characters in books and movies. When they're included, it's generally in a "disability genre" and the books focus on being disabled instead of treating disabled characters like the abled ones.
Generally speaking, Disney -- the paragon of "kid appropriate" -- doesn't include things that it thinks will scar little kids, such as scars. Ever notice how the only characters in Disney films that maintain serious injuries throughout a flick are the bad guys?
If 18-20% of Americans are disabled, that would suggest that most kids, if they aren't disabled themselves, know or are related to a person with a disability. So would it really be traumatizing to see a disabled character in a book or movie treated the same as the other characters?
My previous works have not included a large number of disabled characters; however, I do have on character in my head with a disability, and her day will come. Disabilities are a fact of life, even in modern times, and I think it might be nice if books and movies written for kids reflected that.
What do you think? How do you feel about disabled characters in books and movies for kids? Have you ever written a disabled character?
** The title for this post derives from the song "Kids are Different," which is the theme song for the group Kids on the Block, a puppet troupe that teaches children about living with disabilities.
Recently, through the power of Netflix streaming, I rewatched the movie Quest for Camelot, which a voice in the back of my mind reminded me I'd once seen at a friends house at least a decade ago. Having rewatched it, I decided that aside from two nice songs, it's only got two real strong points (note: the point of this post is, actually, not to knock the movie).
- Cary Elwes voicing the leading guy, because, you know, he's Cary Elwes, and his voice ROCKS.
- Garrett (as voice by Cary Elwes) is blind.
Firstly, I felt that Warner Bros.'s inclusion a disabled character was, at one point, a step towards acknowledging that there are disabled people in America and saying, "Yes, even disabled people can help save their kingdom from evil." For once, we see a film breaking out of the more common Disney paradigm that the world can only be saved by ridiculously good looking, perfectly abled people (who often have bonus powers from somewhere).
Secondly, Garrett now faced some difficulties the other characters didn't (such as having to flee from a dragon -- which he couldn't see -- by jumping on rocks -- which he couldn't see -- across a pit of lava -- which he couldn't see. Thank goodness for assist birds). This made his struggles as a character all the more engaging. To be blunt,in terms of the story, it rather raised the ante on everything that he had to do. He had a harder time than the female lead, because she could see what she needed to do. Also, his experiences gave him the skills he needs to help save the kingdom. Helpful, that.
Thirdly, his experience of how he'd been treated when he lost his sight shaped his view of himself, her family, and their homeland. These factors all went into the motivations that moved him through the story and escalated the conflict. Garrett manages to both make strong points as to why he shouldn't be defined by his blindness and simultaneously define himself by it. (Oh, character angst.)
Okay, now that I've gone on and on about why Garret is definitely my favorite part of that movie, I'll circle back to my thesis. Namely, the rarity of disabled characters in books and movies. When they're included, it's generally in a "disability genre" and the books focus on being disabled instead of treating disabled characters like the abled ones.
Generally speaking, Disney -- the paragon of "kid appropriate" -- doesn't include things that it thinks will scar little kids, such as scars. Ever notice how the only characters in Disney films that maintain serious injuries throughout a flick are the bad guys?
- Ex: Scar has a scar for all of Lion King.
- Ex: Dorie's scars from the jelly fish attack only last on scene in Finding Nemo.
- Ex: Mulan. Every good guy in the movie gets seriously beat up on. Does it show? Nope. They bruise once then are magically restored. They can even regrow teeth.
- Exception: In Finding Nemo, Nemo has a bad fin, as does Gill. However, these aspects define the characters. They are not incidental aspects. They are essential aspects.
- Exception: The Hunchback of Notre Dame has a hunchbacked MC. On the other hand, that's the primary thing we learn about his character, and he still loses the girl to an abled, and ridiculously good looking (read: Disney ideal) supporting male.
If 18-20% of Americans are disabled, that would suggest that most kids, if they aren't disabled themselves, know or are related to a person with a disability. So would it really be traumatizing to see a disabled character in a book or movie treated the same as the other characters?
My previous works have not included a large number of disabled characters; however, I do have on character in my head with a disability, and her day will come. Disabilities are a fact of life, even in modern times, and I think it might be nice if books and movies written for kids reflected that.
What do you think? How do you feel about disabled characters in books and movies for kids? Have you ever written a disabled character?
** The title for this post derives from the song "Kids are Different," which is the theme song for the group Kids on the Block, a puppet troupe that teaches children about living with disabilities.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Somehow, I Love You
In the comments of Monday's post, Melissa brought up the point that Malfoy does have lovable qualities as the series progresses. This is true. As the series progressed, I definitely felt some love for Malfoy. Besides that, I've definitely seen some fanfiction writers (yes, I do read that on occasion), who've made him and a few of the more dastardly characters very lovable without sacrificing much of the back story and basic personality of the characters. Thus, we have proof, it can be done.Even the most unlovable seeming character can garner the love and sympathy of the reader. Here's how: Give the reader something to love.
That sounds simplistic, but it's true. In the midst of all the bad and wicked, give the reader a nice quality, a good trait, a relatable aspect, something for the reader to grasp on to.
Think of it this way: Most people in the world are not wholly good or wholly evil. You know how good guys have those nice things called flaws and weaknesses that make them human? Well bad guys have these nice things called redeeming qualities that do basically the same thing.
Redeeming qualities can be a lot of things. Maybe your villain has a habit of killing off the henchmen who fail to serve him badly. That's not lovable. But maybe he also loves dogs and has a habit of taking care of any strays he finds. People love people who loves dogs. Or maybe your anti-hero loves his mother and visits her every weekend. It's a lot harder to hate a guy who's nice to his mama.
The Obligatory Harry Potter Reference (Because the bit about Malfoy earlier was simply not sufficient): Snape. In a large way, it would be easy very to hate on Snape. After all, in the beginning of the first book
, he picks on Harry just because Harry's James's kid. In the second book, Snape desperately tries to get Harry and Ron expelled after the Wamping Willow thing, and then he tries to get Harry kicked off the Quidditch team. Really, you could go on and on. Or, if you don't want to think too hard, just listen to what Harry and Ron say about him for most of the series. If the heroes don't like him, he must be evil, right?But, alternatively, Snape was really in love with Lily Evans, even after she married the guy who used to beat him up in school. In the first book, Snape saved Harry's life. In the second book, Snape brewed the Mandrake Restorative that revived Hermione. When you look at Snape in that light, it's a lot harder to hate him. Don't you love him just a little bit? I do.
Have there ever been characters you hated even though everyone loved them? Why'd you like 'em so much?
Friday, October 8, 2010
Some General Randomness
First off, I'd like to take this opportunity to remind every citizen of the US who is of age and eligible to register to vote. If you won't be in your area on election day, register to vote absentee. Just to remember, we live in what's pretty much a democracy. (Sort of a democracy. Sort of a republic. Trust me, I've heard of people expound on this. I won't.) Remember, as Shaw said, “Democracy is a device that insures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.” Or, more to the point, to quote H.L. Mencken, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." So, let's vote people. Register, and vote!
Moving on...
I wanted to share two pieces of video phenomenon.
First: Positive Pranking.
I'd like to help this concept spread, and I've already got some wonderful plans to positive prank my local area. Hope you can spread the love in your area. :-)
Also: A new concept -- A Book.
I've recently received the One Lovely Blog Award from Carolyn Snow Abiad. Thanks so much for thinking of me, Carolyn.
Rules:
Moving on...
I wanted to share two pieces of video phenomenon.
First: Positive Pranking.
I'd like to help this concept spread, and I've already got some wonderful plans to positive prank my local area. Hope you can spread the love in your area. :-)
Also: A new concept -- A Book.
I've recently received the One Lovely Blog Award from Carolyn Snow Abiad. Thanks so much for thinking of me, Carolyn.
Rules:
- Acknowledge the blogger who gave it to you
- Pass it on to 15 bloggers you have recently met.
- Kate Coursey @ Weaving Colors
- Jenna Wallace @ Writing in the Dream State
- Karen Amanda Hooper @ * Eternal Moonshine of a Daydreaming Mind *
- Roni Loren @ Fiction Groupie
- Tawna Fenske @ Don't Pet Me, I'm Writing
- Hannah Moskowitz @ Invincible Summer
- Stephanie Thornton @ Hatshepsut: The Writing of a Novel
- Genie of the Shell @ The Magic Nutshell
- Creepy Query Girl @ Creepy Query Girl
- Jennifer Daiker @ unedited
- Jayne Ferst @ A Novice Novelist
- Tere Kirkland @ The Lesser Key
- Talei Loto @ The Lady Doth Scribe
- Mia @ Literary Toast and Jam
- Lola Sharp @ Sharp Pen/ Dull Sword
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
October PSAs
October is National Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
One year, when I was in high school, one of the organizations put up signs that said, "Support B
reast Cancer." I think we can all realize that they meant "Support Breast Cancer Research" but really it felt like one of those occasions when the jokes made themselves. "Really," my friends and I would say, "you want to support a disease that kills millions of women? Not sure we can get behind that."
Within two years, two women I love found lumps in their breasts. They're both better now, but it's scary. It's one of those things you don't think is going to happen to you or people you know. But it can, and early detection is incredibly helpful in the treatment and cure of cancer. So get mammograms and perform regular self-screenings. (Guys who might be reading this post, this goes for you too. A Y-chromosome does not except you from breast cancer. Sorry.) Combat breast cancer!
Or, as one friend used to say, "Save the ta-tas!"
October is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender History Month.
While I could seize this opportunity to go discuss ad nauseum various members of the LGBT community who have done great things for history, culture, literature, etc, I won't. (Even though my love for Oscar Wilde knows few bounds). Instead, I want to link to this youtube channel.
This is the channel for the It Gets Better Project, which was started by Dan Savage and his partner Terry Miller started in memory of Billy Lucas, who committed suicide at the age of 15 because of the sexual-orientation related bullying he endured.
It want to say this to anyone on this site enduring bullying and harassment right now. Life might suck right now. I remember when life sucked in high school. Trust me, I know what that harassment looks like and sounds like, and I know what it can do to a person. I also know it gets better. I think my friends who got harassed in high school would agree with me that it gets better. You'll go out in the world, and you'll find people who love you and accept you for you are. People who can love like that do exist. You've just got to hold on until you find them. Because it gets better, and you should be there to see it.
One year, when I was in high school, one of the organizations put up signs that said, "Support B
reast Cancer." I think we can all realize that they meant "Support Breast Cancer Research" but really it felt like one of those occasions when the jokes made themselves. "Really," my friends and I would say, "you want to support a disease that kills millions of women? Not sure we can get behind that."Within two years, two women I love found lumps in their breasts. They're both better now, but it's scary. It's one of those things you don't think is going to happen to you or people you know. But it can, and early detection is incredibly helpful in the treatment and cure of cancer. So get mammograms and perform regular self-screenings. (Guys who might be reading this post, this goes for you too. A Y-chromosome does not except you from breast cancer. Sorry.) Combat breast cancer!
Or, as one friend used to say, "Save the ta-tas!"
October is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender History Month.
While I could seize this opportunity to go discuss ad nauseum various members of the LGBT community who have done great things for history, culture, literature, etc, I won't. (Even though my love for Oscar Wilde knows few bounds). Instead, I want to link to this youtube channel.
This is the channel for the It Gets Better Project, which was started by Dan Savage and his partner Terry Miller started in memory of Billy Lucas, who committed suicide at the age of 15 because of the sexual-orientation related bullying he endured.
It want to say this to anyone on this site enduring bullying and harassment right now. Life might suck right now. I remember when life sucked in high school. Trust me, I know what that harassment looks like and sounds like, and I know what it can do to a person. I also know it gets better. I think my friends who got harassed in high school would agree with me that it gets better. You'll go out in the world, and you'll find people who love you and accept you for you are. People who can love like that do exist. You've just got to hold on until you find them. Because it gets better, and you should be there to see it.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
A Banned Book Review
The Rejectionist and Tahereh suggested that the perfect way to celebrate Banned Books Week would be to post a review of a great Banned Book. I like this idea. In fact, I like it so much, I've decided to do it. (Didn't see that coming, did you. ;))
Introducing: The Giver by Lois Lowry
Quick Intro:
Jonas was born into the perfect world. Here, couples are matched by the government for a perfect balance, careers are given out by the government for the perfect match, and death and birth are arranged by the government for perfect timing. But when Jonas turns 12 and is assigned the role of Receiver of Memories, he learns that his world isn't as perfect as it seemed.
My thoughts:
By the time I'd left grade school, I'd probably read this book three times. Most of my grade had read it, too. (I know at least one teacher assigned it.) Quotes from this book were actually an inside joke in my classroom.
I think of this book as dystopia-light, intro reading for the kids who'll grow up to adore 1984, Fahrenheit 451, and other books on the Banned Books list. Moreover, it's got a male MC and a gender neutral plot, doesn't involve too much violence or sexuality, and the diction is not overly advanced, so this book is appropriate for anyone 10+. Actually, I don't think I've ever met someone who didn't enjoy the book. (Though, I could be repressing the opinions of some of my 6th grade class. Can't remember all of those.)
Other thoughts:
A West Wing quote about book banning: "He banned Fahrenheit 451 which is about banning books." I'd like to take this moment to appreciate the irony (and irony makes the world go 'round) of the fact that many books people like to ban either involve banning books or involve worlds where there are no disseminated books. 1984, Fahrenheit 451, The Giver, etc.
In other news: Talei, thank you for giving me the award. As I've previously received it, I'll simply link to that post.
Introducing: The Giver by Lois Lowry
Quick Intro:
Jonas was born into the perfect world. Here, couples are matched by the government for a perfect balance, careers are given out by the government for the perfect match, and death and birth are arranged by the government for perfect timing. But when Jonas turns 12 and is assigned the role of Receiver of Memories, he learns that his world isn't as perfect as it seemed.
My thoughts:
By the time I'd left grade school, I'd probably read this book three times. Most of my grade had read it, too. (I know at least one teacher assigned it.) Quotes from this book were actually an inside joke in my classroom.
I think of this book as dystopia-light, intro reading for the kids who'll grow up to adore 1984, Fahrenheit 451, and other books on the Banned Books list. Moreover, it's got a male MC and a gender neutral plot, doesn't involve too much violence or sexuality, and the diction is not overly advanced, so this book is appropriate for anyone 10+. Actually, I don't think I've ever met someone who didn't enjoy the book. (Though, I could be repressing the opinions of some of my 6th grade class. Can't remember all of those.)
Other thoughts:
A West Wing quote about book banning: "He banned Fahrenheit 451 which is about banning books." I'd like to take this moment to appreciate the irony (and irony makes the world go 'round) of the fact that many books people like to ban either involve banning books or involve worlds where there are no disseminated books. 1984, Fahrenheit 451, The Giver, etc.
In other news: Talei, thank you for giving me the award. As I've previously received it, I'll simply link to that post.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
STOI
Hello, hello, fellow denizens of the Universe En Violet. I understand we have some new friends with us this week. Glad to see you all. Nice to have you with us. ^_^ Sit down, take a load off, stay a while. I'd offer you cookies and milk, but I've been given to understand that offering people internet cookies is considered poor form in many circles. At any rate, there's some cyber-milk (good for your cyber-bones) to my left. Enjoy.
Now, because my regular posting schedule is about to be interrupted by a blogfest, this Wednesday post is going to be lighter fair, Some Things Of Interest (STOI -- for those of you who missed my creating of that acronym) and linkaging. Enjoy.
First, some Ranting and Raving: I've done my share of ranting and raving on this site, and I'm sure there's more to come somewhere. But, until that time, these two women have done it so excellently that I've decided to share their words.
Kiersten White does a great post on the importance on owning one's genre and not being ashamed of it. Right on, girl!
And Tara Maya's post on the self-imposed deadlines (they do exist!) is awesome and imbued with plenty of fire.
Some Other Things: Justine Dell is having a contest to celebrate having 250+ followers. Go over and say hi! :-)
Also,a while back, Vicki gave me the Versatile Blogger Award, and I've been remiss in thanking her for that. It was very sweet of you to think of my, Vicki.
(As I have already participated in this Award previously, I think I'll skip posting the seven secrets again, but if you really want 'em -- can't say I blame you, it's an interesting list --, here's the link to my original list.)
How are you all doing today?
Now, because my regular posting schedule is about to be interrupted by a blogfest, this Wednesday post is going to be lighter fair, Some Things Of Interest (STOI -- for those of you who missed my creating of that acronym) and linkaging. Enjoy.
First, some Ranting and Raving: I've done my share of ranting and raving on this site, and I'm sure there's more to come somewhere. But, until that time, these two women have done it so excellently that I've decided to share their words.
Kiersten White does a great post on the importance on owning one's genre and not being ashamed of it. Right on, girl!
And Tara Maya's post on the self-imposed deadlines (they do exist!) is awesome and imbued with plenty of fire.
Some Other Things: Justine Dell is having a contest to celebrate having 250+ followers. Go over and say hi! :-)
Also,a while back, Vicki gave me the Versatile Blogger Award, and I've been remiss in thanking her for that. It was very sweet of you to think of my, Vicki.
(As I have already participated in this Award previously, I think I'll skip posting the seven secrets again, but if you really want 'em -- can't say I blame you, it's an interesting list --, here's the link to my original list.)
How are you all doing today?
Monday, September 27, 2010
Banned Books, a Blogfest, and Good Advice
Banned Books Week kicked in on Sept. 25h. Since we all know how I feel about banning books (if you're desperate to hear it, click here or here. I wouldn't fault you. I like my posts.) I'll spare you another rant/diatribe/epic poem on my feelings on the issue. Instead, I'll tell you a story.
(Unfortunately, I'm too far away from any of my old diaries to participate in the Public Humiliation Uncontest, this story can suffice for that moment too. Except I think of it more as fun than humiliating.)
When I was in high school, I was a member of the debate team. (This should not be construed as a representation that my friends and I were any good at it. But we had a lot of fun.) For my first and second years of high school, Debate Club was sort of a Geek Collective. Even the team captain admitted that you had to be something of a geek to want in.
Anyway, if you've ever participated in something called Cross-Examination Debate, like our captain did, then you'll know that Cross-Ex debaters travel with what we called Debate Boxes. They contained the deep knowledge of the universe, and all the information you might need to combat any argument made by the opposing side, ever. That too.
If you're like just about every single other person in the world, you've probably never made a thorough examination of one of these boxes. But it can be a long trip to a meet, and those were some pretty interesting boxes. Now, in one of the boxes, there was something called the Porn is Good file.
Before you scream at me and threaten to call the FCC, Google, The Hidden League of Blog Controllers, or whoever moderates blogs these days, I'm going to remind you that this box contained any argument needed to block any point your opposition could ever make. So, if you tried to shut down an opponent by saying they were destroying free speech, they'd say that the free speech is secretly bad, citing pornography, and thus you needed to defend pornography.
My friends and I spent some time debating the merits of this file and its counter file, the Porn is Bad file. (Oh, Debate Club, I miss you.) This led to some interesting conversations between my friends, me, and the Debate Captain (who once sold me his soul for a water bottle, but that's a different story).
(It should be noted, to protect the innocents, that nothing said during a real or mock debate cannot be assumed to be that person's actual views. You flipped a coin to see who defended what side, so you could easily win a debate saying something you firmly believed to be false. Anything said on the bus, likewise, was an intellectual exercise and shouldn't be held against a person. (Note: unless you're running for office. In that case, everything from debates, press statements, and shoe size will be held against you in the court of public opinion.))
Debate Captain: So, you see, pornography will lead men to think about women in a sexualized way. Therefore, we must ban it.
The Other One: But, don't romance novels cause women to think about men in a sexualized manner? Do we have to ban those too?
Debate Captain: You are absolutely right. **He points to a sticker on the Debate Box that states READ BANNED BOOKS.**
So, in the spirit of my Debate Captain and Banned Books Week, I'd like to urge you to take some time this week and, you guessed it, read a banned book. (If you're looking for suggestions, click here.) Me, I'm working my way through 1984 by George Orwell. So far, plusgood ;).
How are you guys celebrating Banned Books Week? Anyone else participating in a blogfest at the moment? Anyone else a debater in H.S.? Or a member of any other geeky clubs?
Also, while this post might have anything to do with writing or banned books, her advice is both useful and important, so I strongly urge everyone click read Kiertsen White's post on ectopic pregnancy. It could save your life.
(Unfortunately, I'm too far away from any of my old diaries to participate in the Public Humiliation Uncontest, this story can suffice for that moment too. Except I think of it more as fun than humiliating.)
When I was in high school, I was a member of the debate team. (This should not be construed as a representation that my friends and I were any good at it. But we had a lot of fun.) For my first and second years of high school, Debate Club was sort of a Geek Collective. Even the team captain admitted that you had to be something of a geek to want in.
Anyway, if you've ever participated in something called Cross-Examination Debate, like our captain did, then you'll know that Cross-Ex debaters travel with what we called Debate Boxes. They contained the deep knowledge of the universe, and all the information you might need to combat any argument made by the opposing side, ever. That too.
If you're like just about every single other person in the world, you've probably never made a thorough examination of one of these boxes. But it can be a long trip to a meet, and those were some pretty interesting boxes. Now, in one of the boxes, there was something called the Porn is Good file.
Before you scream at me and threaten to call the FCC, Google, The Hidden League of Blog Controllers, or whoever moderates blogs these days, I'm going to remind you that this box contained any argument needed to block any point your opposition could ever make. So, if you tried to shut down an opponent by saying they were destroying free speech, they'd say that the free speech is secretly bad, citing pornography, and thus you needed to defend pornography.
My friends and I spent some time debating the merits of this file and its counter file, the Porn is Bad file. (Oh, Debate Club, I miss you.) This led to some interesting conversations between my friends, me, and the Debate Captain (who once sold me his soul for a water bottle, but that's a different story).
(It should be noted, to protect the innocents, that nothing said during a real or mock debate cannot be assumed to be that person's actual views. You flipped a coin to see who defended what side, so you could easily win a debate saying something you firmly believed to be false. Anything said on the bus, likewise, was an intellectual exercise and shouldn't be held against a person. (Note: unless you're running for office. In that case, everything from debates, press statements, and shoe size will be held against you in the court of public opinion.))
Debate Captain: So, you see, pornography will lead men to think about women in a sexualized way. Therefore, we must ban it.
The Other One: But, don't romance novels cause women to think about men in a sexualized manner? Do we have to ban those too?
Debate Captain: You are absolutely right. **He points to a sticker on the Debate Box that states READ BANNED BOOKS.**
So, in the spirit of my Debate Captain and Banned Books Week, I'd like to urge you to take some time this week and, you guessed it, read a banned book. (If you're looking for suggestions, click here.) Me, I'm working my way through 1984 by George Orwell. So far, plusgood ;).
How are you guys celebrating Banned Books Week? Anyone else participating in a blogfest at the moment? Anyone else a debater in H.S.? Or a member of any other geeky clubs?
Also, while this post might have anything to do with writing or banned books, her advice is both useful and important, so I strongly urge everyone click read Kiertsen White's post on ectopic pregnancy. It could save your life.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Character Roots
As I hop down from my censorship soapbox, I jumped on the bandwagon and doing a post today about writing compelling characters.
I think most people will agree with me when I say that compelling characters must be fully realized, rounded out characters. They have to be, otherwise there'd be nothing in them to relate to, and then no one would care about what happens to them. If you've ever read a book/watched a movie/seen a play/listened to a radio show where the characters are really just cardboard cutouts chilling in the story while the plot does its thing, then you know that can get old fast. After all, what's the point of watching people you don't care about do stuff, since you won't care if they succeed?
One thing that most fully realized and rounded out characters have are personality traits. You know, they have likes and dislikes, favorite things, things that scare them so much they scream like little girls as the sight/sound/taste of them.
Now, here's the kicker about personality traits: they can't be completely random.
Why? They'll make no sense, and they'll look like you put them there to make the character appear rounded out, and the audience will be able to smell it.
Story time: A while ago, Captain Film Major and I were discussing an old kid's movie, and he pointed out that the MC, a girl of about nine, I believe, had a big thing for Elvis. Captain Film Major's response to this was something along the lines of (and I'm paraphrasing, dude, so if you see this, chill), "It would've been great if they'd explained that at all, instead of just chucking it out there so that it made no sense." (Okay, so, I paraphrased a lot. Probably should've written the exact wording down. Note for next time.)
Much as it pains me to admit that Captain Film Major might have point about a movie, he had a point. Most nine-year-olds I've met aren't Elvis fans. Most probably couldn't tell you who The King is. So how did this character know? They don't say. They just say she likes Elvis. Now, if she'd said, "He was my dad's favorite... before he died. He used to sing along to the CDs when he did the dishes... drove Mom crazy," it would have had meaning. Because now we know how she developed this knowledge and interest, and we know a bit more about her character as a result.
Here's the deal: If you're character is anything like just about every human being I've ever met (and I've met a fair number of human beings), likes, dislikes, favorites, and phobias come about for some reason. There's often something in someone's background that led to that reaction.
Story time: I love Irish music. I listen to it all the time. Captain Film Major hates it. He listens to it never. He blames his dislike on having to listen to it all them time when we were kids. I blame my love on having to listen to it all the time when we were kids. Both of our responses to that music are not random but the result of things in our past.
Obligatory Harry Potter reference: (Contains SPOILERS!) (And, seriously, if you haven't read all 7 Harry Potter books, stop reading this post now and get on it.) (No, I'm not kidding. It's much more important. Go.) Severus Snape considered himself the Half Blood Prince, because he preferred to associate himself with his mother's side of the family, because he didn't like his Muggle father, because his dad beat his mom. See how that relates to his life. Snape wasn't a fan of really any Muggles, because his dad beat his mom, which is how he could so easily fall in with Death Eaters. Severus Snape loved Lily Evans (later Lily Potter), so he betrayed the Death Eaters, joined the Order of the Phoenix, fought against Voldemort, and did everything he could to keep Harry alive. See how that relates to his history?
(Okay, so that was several Harry Potter references, but I think I made my point.)
To create compelling characters, they have to be fully formed individuals, and they aren't going to be fully formed by being hashed together bits of randomness. Follow the random to the history that made them who they are, and follow the history you have to the everyday things that will present themselves in your character's life.
Have you ever come across a character seemingly composed of unrelated bits? How did you feel about that? Could you still relate to the character? How much time do you put into your characters' histories? Have you ever learned something about a character by looking for the cause of a seemingly random aspect of their personality?
I think most people will agree with me when I say that compelling characters must be fully realized, rounded out characters. They have to be, otherwise there'd be nothing in them to relate to, and then no one would care about what happens to them. If you've ever read a book/watched a movie/seen a play/listened to a radio show where the characters are really just cardboard cutouts chilling in the story while the plot does its thing, then you know that can get old fast. After all, what's the point of watching people you don't care about do stuff, since you won't care if they succeed?
One thing that most fully realized and rounded out characters have are personality traits. You know, they have likes and dislikes, favorite things, things that scare them so much they scream like little girls as the sight/sound/taste of them.
Now, here's the kicker about personality traits: they can't be completely random.
Why? They'll make no sense, and they'll look like you put them there to make the character appear rounded out, and the audience will be able to smell it.
Story time: A while ago, Captain Film Major and I were discussing an old kid's movie, and he pointed out that the MC, a girl of about nine, I believe, had a big thing for Elvis. Captain Film Major's response to this was something along the lines of (and I'm paraphrasing, dude, so if you see this, chill), "It would've been great if they'd explained that at all, instead of just chucking it out there so that it made no sense." (Okay, so, I paraphrased a lot. Probably should've written the exact wording down. Note for next time.)
Much as it pains me to admit that Captain Film Major might have point about a movie, he had a point. Most nine-year-olds I've met aren't Elvis fans. Most probably couldn't tell you who The King is. So how did this character know? They don't say. They just say she likes Elvis. Now, if she'd said, "He was my dad's favorite... before he died. He used to sing along to the CDs when he did the dishes... drove Mom crazy," it would have had meaning. Because now we know how she developed this knowledge and interest, and we know a bit more about her character as a result.
Here's the deal: If you're character is anything like just about every human being I've ever met (and I've met a fair number of human beings), likes, dislikes, favorites, and phobias come about for some reason. There's often something in someone's background that led to that reaction.
Story time: I love Irish music. I listen to it all the time. Captain Film Major hates it. He listens to it never. He blames his dislike on having to listen to it all them time when we were kids. I blame my love on having to listen to it all the time when we were kids. Both of our responses to that music are not random but the result of things in our past.
Obligatory Harry Potter reference: (Contains SPOILERS!) (And, seriously, if you haven't read all 7 Harry Potter books, stop reading this post now and get on it.) (No, I'm not kidding. It's much more important. Go.) Severus Snape considered himself the Half Blood Prince, because he preferred to associate himself with his mother's side of the family, because he didn't like his Muggle father, because his dad beat his mom. See how that relates to his life. Snape wasn't a fan of really any Muggles, because his dad beat his mom, which is how he could so easily fall in with Death Eaters. Severus Snape loved Lily Evans (later Lily Potter), so he betrayed the Death Eaters, joined the Order of the Phoenix, fought against Voldemort, and did everything he could to keep Harry alive. See how that relates to his history?
(Okay, so that was several Harry Potter references, but I think I made my point.)
To create compelling characters, they have to be fully formed individuals, and they aren't going to be fully formed by being hashed together bits of randomness. Follow the random to the history that made them who they are, and follow the history you have to the everyday things that will present themselves in your character's life.
Have you ever come across a character seemingly composed of unrelated bits? How did you feel about that? Could you still relate to the character? How much time do you put into your characters' histories? Have you ever learned something about a character by looking for the cause of a seemingly random aspect of their personality?
Monday, September 20, 2010
Time to SPEAK
Today, I had other plans for posted material; however, due to a post by Janet Reid, a certain disturbing situation has come to my attention. A man named Dr. Wesley Scroggins wrote an editorial for the News-Leader in Springfield, Missouri. I've linked to it, because I'm sure you'll find it enlightening. I did. Until I read it, I hadn't realized that the book Speak by Laurie Halse Anderson is soft porn.
That's right. He called it soft porn.
Now, I've read the book Speak. I've listened to the audiobook. I've watched the movie. And let me tell you this, it is not porn. In no way, shape or form, do I believe these things could be confused.
In case you have not previously read the book or seen the movie, Speak deals with the story of a young woman who is raped and chooses not to speak out about it. It's a rough book to read, as it deals with the challenging topic of rape, elective mutism, and PTSD.
Yes, the book and movie contain rape scenes. They are not pornographic. I can only characterize Mr. Scroggin's assertions that they are as terrifying. If you think I might be wrong, read the book, watch the movie. Double check me. I'm begging you.
I am not a Christian, but I do know many, and I've yet to meet the one who finds these books out of keeping with the tenants of their faith. I've yet to meet any religious person who's said that of Speak.
I am not a parent, but I know that I would not shrink from letting my teenaged daughter or son read this book. I know my parents didn't shrink from letting me see it as a teenager, nor did the parents of my friends.
What I am is a human being, and what I know is that the best way for us to grow and understand ourselves as people is to turn to others and hear their stories, even fictional ones. To find the truths in the stories of others and allow ourselves to be moved by and to learn from them. I know that the book Speak had nothing but a positive impact on my life.
Today, I will begin writing letters to the school district where Mr. Scroggins lives and encourage them not to ban the book. If you would like to do the same, you can get the addresses from a link on Ms. Anderson's response on her website.
To hear another Myra McEntire speak out on this issue, click here. I found her response considered, eloquent, and pointed.
To read one of the most moving pieces I've ever seen on the Internet, click here. C.J. Redwine is one of the most qualified commenter on the subject I could possibly imagine, and her response demonstrates a poise and grace I don't think I could have managed.
That's right. He called it soft porn.
Now, I've read the book Speak. I've listened to the audiobook. I've watched the movie. And let me tell you this, it is not porn. In no way, shape or form, do I believe these things could be confused.
In case you have not previously read the book or seen the movie, Speak deals with the story of a young woman who is raped and chooses not to speak out about it. It's a rough book to read, as it deals with the challenging topic of rape, elective mutism, and PTSD.
Yes, the book and movie contain rape scenes. They are not pornographic. I can only characterize Mr. Scroggin's assertions that they are as terrifying. If you think I might be wrong, read the book, watch the movie. Double check me. I'm begging you.
I am not a Christian, but I do know many, and I've yet to meet the one who finds these books out of keeping with the tenants of their faith. I've yet to meet any religious person who's said that of Speak.
I am not a parent, but I know that I would not shrink from letting my teenaged daughter or son read this book. I know my parents didn't shrink from letting me see it as a teenager, nor did the parents of my friends.
What I am is a human being, and what I know is that the best way for us to grow and understand ourselves as people is to turn to others and hear their stories, even fictional ones. To find the truths in the stories of others and allow ourselves to be moved by and to learn from them. I know that the book Speak had nothing but a positive impact on my life.
Today, I will begin writing letters to the school district where Mr. Scroggins lives and encourage them not to ban the book. If you would like to do the same, you can get the addresses from a link on Ms. Anderson's response on her website.
To hear another Myra McEntire speak out on this issue, click here. I found her response considered, eloquent, and pointed.
To read one of the most moving pieces I've ever seen on the Internet, click here. C.J. Redwine is one of the most qualified commenter on the subject I could possibly imagine, and her response demonstrates a poise and grace I don't think I could have managed.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Harry, Larry, and Me
Yesterday, Kiersten White did an interesting post about how her blogging experience and style has changed over the time she's been writing it. She ends the main post with the sentence: "The day I start thinking of this blog as just a tool is the day I'll stop writing it." This post sparked some thoughts in me.
It occurs to me that some bloggers are using their blogs as a medium for getting their name and their work "out there" or as a means of building their online platform to help their getting an agent/getting published/getting readers once their published. So, for some writers, blogs are tools. For some, they're very successful tools, even. Lots of readers know this persons name and will recognize it if/when the book is sold. Then again, a well-used tool is still a tool.
I, for one, don't think of my blog as a tool. It certainly wouldn't help me develop the sort of great fame that could make me famous as a writer, especially because I am not, in case you haven't noticed, using my legal name. Thus, I don't think I'm likely to achieve The Gospel According to Larry-type blog fame or suddenly become the next Harry Potter ("Hey, look, over there! Next to the tall kid with the red hair!" Hey, look, a purple blog! Somehow connected to the pretty, pink blog! Unlikely. (And yes, I know, I've read those books too often. I admit it.)) with this blog. That's okay with me.
I see my blog as a means of connecting with the other interesting members of the blogosphere. Y'all are fascinating people, and you're always coming up with neat and informative things to say. You're what makes the web worth it for me.
I'm with Ms. White on this one. The day this blog becomes a tool for garnering fame, is the day it should probably be shut down.
It occurs to me that some bloggers are using their blogs as a medium for getting their name and their work "out there" or as a means of building their online platform to help their getting an agent/getting published/getting readers once their published. So, for some writers, blogs are tools. For some, they're very successful tools, even. Lots of readers know this persons name and will recognize it if/when the book is sold. Then again, a well-used tool is still a tool.
I, for one, don't think of my blog as a tool. It certainly wouldn't help me develop the sort of great fame that could make me famous as a writer, especially because I am not, in case you haven't noticed, using my legal name. Thus, I don't think I'm likely to achieve The Gospel According to Larry-type blog fame or suddenly become the next Harry Potter ("Hey, look, over there! Next to the tall kid with the red hair!" Hey, look, a purple blog! Somehow connected to the pretty, pink blog! Unlikely. (And yes, I know, I've read those books too often. I admit it.)) with this blog. That's okay with me.
I see my blog as a means of connecting with the other interesting members of the blogosphere. Y'all are fascinating people, and you're always coming up with neat and informative things to say. You're what makes the web worth it for me.
I'm with Ms. White on this one. The day this blog becomes a tool for garnering fame, is the day it should probably be shut down.
Friday, September 3, 2010
STOI
For this weekend's selection, since I'm moving to an Undisclosed Location and therefore short on time for Moments of Awesome Geniusness, I've decided to share the love and point out other moments of Awesome Geniusness I've watched others have lately. Spreading the love.
Tamara Heiner wrote a great post on the nursing of an MS. It's clever and insightful. Go check it out.
The brilliant Nathan Bransford did a great post that finally explained High Concept in language that
I (and consequently my band of MS typing monkeys) could understand. Check it out. Since he's been very brilliant lately, he also did a great post on First Ideas. Check it out too.Tamara Heiner wrote a great post on the nursing of an MS. It's clever and insightful. Go check it out.
The brilliant Nathan Bransford did a great post that finally explained High Concept in language that
And Pimp My Novel ran a nice post the other day about meeting deadlines, which is good thing to do in writing and in everyday life. Check it out.
I hope these are interesting and helpful to you. And, you know what, if you've seen interesting and useful around the Internet lately (or in the last decade, if you happen to still have the link saved -- and if you do, respect) feel free to post the link in the comments section. Share the love. :-)
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Thanks
The charming Tessa from Tessa's Blurb was kind enough to think of me for the Versatile Blogger award. Thank you, dearie. :)For the award, I'm supposed to post 7 true things about myself. I hope they amuse you.
1) The Other One and I once convinced the younger brother of a close friend that we had a triplet named Elizabeth. We took turns pretending to be Elizabeth, ourselves, and each other, which I'm sure didn't make it any easier for him to figure us out. We kept the charade going for a month and a half until he was about to introduce me to other people as Elizabeth. Then we decided it might be going a tad far.
2) Once, in my younger days, I put a friend in a locker and helped put some other people in lockers as well. Including The Other One. And my best friend. And school librarian. Twice. And the vice principle. (It's not as heinous as it sounds, I promise. It was part of a tradition. And I hopped into a locker myself while this was all going on. What can I say, we geeks at my Junior High were a little strange.)
3) I discovered earlier this month through a link someone sent The Other One online that we might secretly be Canadian citizens. I don't know for sure, because that would involve forms and documents and getting the government to look into things, but that greatly amuses me.
4) I have an almost encyclopedic knowledge of the first four Harry Potter books (did you know the first word Harry actually says in the series is 'Nearly'? yeah, I'm that geeky) and the first four seasons of The West Wing. And I'm getting there with the first four seasons of Bones. (Okay, what is it with me and the number four?)
5) I honestly do not remember the last time I got more than two inches cut off my hair. I have a feeling it was more than 3.5 years ago but less than 6, but any more specific time approximation alludes me. This fact does not prevent people from asking me for that information on a semi-regular basis.
6) I don't watch movies. I mean, I go to the cinema with my family when we're all together or with friends if we all have spare time, but left to my own devices, I tend not to seek movies out. I do not have a Top 250 movies list. I couldn't name 250 movies if someone paid me to.
7) On the other hand, if someone paid me to, I could recite all 50 US states in under 5 minutes. In alphabetical order. Yep, I've got skills.
Now, it's my pleasure to pass this award on to some other charming people.
1) Natalie Whipple at Between Fact and Fiction
2) Davin Malasarn, Scott Bailey, and Michelle Argyle at The Literary Lab
3)Dana Elemdorff at A Squirrel Among Lions
4)Tamara Heiner at Chasing Dreams
5)Elena Johnson at Elana Johnson
6)Stephanie Thornton at Hatshepsut
7)Kiersten White at Kiersten Writes
8)Lisa and Lauren Roecker at Lisa and Laura Write
9)xoxo at Making it up as I go...
10) Nicole Ducleroir at One Significant Moment at Time
11) Anne Gallagher at Piedmont Writer
12) Tiana Smith at Tiana Smith
13) Jenna Wallace at Writing in the Dream State
14) Beth Revise at writing it out
15) Roni Griffin at * Fiction Groupie *
Sunday, June 6, 2010
I'm in Awe of My Friends
I'm pretty in awe of some of my friends. See, one of my friends is studying to be a director. So, what did he do last year? He convinced one of my other friends to translate The Seagull for him, he persuaded a mutual friend to help him make 1930s costumes, he cast some actors -- including The Other One! -- and he made the movie. From what I've seen, it looks pretty good, if I do say so myself, though I might just be 50-75% biased. Either way, I'm wicked impressed with him.
Here's the trailer.
Here's the trailer.
The Seagull from David Crowley on Vimeo.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Violet is Going Green
I'm making my blog carbon neutral. :-)
If you'd like to as well, here are some steps.
1) Click on the pretty lead image above.
2) Copy the code into a post or your sidebar.
3) Email the link to CO2-neutral@kaufda.de
4) They plant a tree. This makes your blog carbon neutral.
5) Feel happy. :-)
For more info on how this works, click here. Have a great day.
If you'd like to as well, here are some steps.
1) Click on the pretty lead image above.
2) Copy the code into a post or your sidebar.
3) Email the link to CO2-neutral@kaufda.de
4) They plant a tree. This makes your blog carbon neutral.
5) Feel happy. :-)
For more info on how this works, click here. Have a great day.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
The Process
I totally absconded with this survey from Sex Scenes At Starbucks. I thought it seemed interesting, and I'm really interested in seeing in what y'all say when you borrow and re-post it (as I hope you will).
If you asked 50 writers to describe their “writing processes,” you’d probably get 75 different responses. Some writers stick to a set of inviolable rules, others “meander across the meadow,” while others invoke voodoo dolls and incense, heavy on the incense (substitute “alcohol” for “incense” as required).
I have never invoked a voodoo doll in my writing process. Though, I can't deny, I do sort of meander at times.
Do you write daily or whenever you can grab a chance?
I grab a chance. I try to write daily, but that's usually not how things work out. Yes, darn it, I'm inadequate.
Are you an outliner or a “seat-of-the-pantser”?
I'm pretty much an outliner (though they're loose outlines), though I don't deny that I'm not above following an idea to the end of the rainbow.
Do you revise as you go or do you plow through?
I tend to plow through and then come back. Sure, I sometimes duck back and make notes, but I like to get to the end of the deal before taking it all apart.
Do you write what you want or what you think has a shot of selling?
I'm a lot better at writing what I want to write, mainly because I haven't the foggiest how to determine what sells. But, as the wall I'm currently looking at says, "Be real to yourself and everything else will follow." I'm going to run with that.
Do you listen to music when you write?
Yeah, pretty much always. I listen to music always. Well, not always music. Sometimes, The West Wing or shows involving the investigation of violent murders. Because, I'm like that.
Now, my merry-men, please go forth. Recreate the survey so I can know more interesting things about you. Enjoy. :-)
Now, my merry-men, please go forth. Recreate the survey so I can know more interesting things about you. Enjoy. :-)
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
To Read On or Not to Read On
Yesterday, in the comments, Genie of the Shell remarked on the importance of both good story and good writing.
This reminded me of a book I recently finished (name to be withheld, sorry. Maybe, one of these days, I'll write about a book whose name I feel okay mentioning. Maybe). At first, the writing didn't grab me, so I didn't pick up the book. However, every time I returned to the bookstore, I'd find myself thinking about that book and looking at it some more. Eventually, I folded. I bought it.
It turned out, the writing never grabbed me. When people asked me how the book was going, I told them, "B/B+. Almost all the points for a good idea."
The only thing the book really had in it's favor was the unique and interesting idea (which, by the by, they misrepresented on the coverflap, which I hate, but that's a story for another time). I kept going for the sake of the idea, but the writing wasn't fabulous, in my opinion.
This isn't the first time I've stuck out mediocre writing for a good plot or idea, and I know I'm not the only person who does that sort of thing.
What does this mean? It means we need good ideas!
Okay, you're all rolling your eyes and saying, "Umm... No duh, we already knew that." But, what I mean is that, though editing is important and story craft is really important, the story and the idea are super important. Maybe even more important. Because, unless you've got an original and interesting idea, there's really no point in crafting it to perfection. It'll feel trite whether it's perfect or not.
I've done this myself. My first novel was ridiculously trite. I didn't bring anything new or original to it. And it took me a good long time to realize that polish that baby all I might, edit the words until they were perfect, it wouldn't change the fact that I was writing a story we'd all seen a million times and not adding to it anything we hadn't seen before.
Ideas are essential to good stories.
Which do you find essential, good writing or good story? If one element is slack, can the other make up for it? Do you sometimes read books with bad or mediocre writing for the sake of a good idea or plot? Will bad writing make you chuck a book away even if the story is good?
This reminded me of a book I recently finished (name to be withheld, sorry. Maybe, one of these days, I'll write about a book whose name I feel okay mentioning. Maybe). At first, the writing didn't grab me, so I didn't pick up the book. However, every time I returned to the bookstore, I'd find myself thinking about that book and looking at it some more. Eventually, I folded. I bought it.
It turned out, the writing never grabbed me. When people asked me how the book was going, I told them, "B/B+. Almost all the points for a good idea."
The only thing the book really had in it's favor was the unique and interesting idea (which, by the by, they misrepresented on the coverflap, which I hate, but that's a story for another time). I kept going for the sake of the idea, but the writing wasn't fabulous, in my opinion.
This isn't the first time I've stuck out mediocre writing for a good plot or idea, and I know I'm not the only person who does that sort of thing.
What does this mean? It means we need good ideas!
Okay, you're all rolling your eyes and saying, "Umm... No duh, we already knew that." But, what I mean is that, though editing is important and story craft is really important, the story and the idea are super important. Maybe even more important. Because, unless you've got an original and interesting idea, there's really no point in crafting it to perfection. It'll feel trite whether it's perfect or not.
I've done this myself. My first novel was ridiculously trite. I didn't bring anything new or original to it. And it took me a good long time to realize that polish that baby all I might, edit the words until they were perfect, it wouldn't change the fact that I was writing a story we'd all seen a million times and not adding to it anything we hadn't seen before.
Ideas are essential to good stories.
Which do you find essential, good writing or good story? If one element is slack, can the other make up for it? Do you sometimes read books with bad or mediocre writing for the sake of a good idea or plot? Will bad writing make you chuck a book away even if the story is good?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
