To follow up from last week, we really enjoyed The Desolation of Smaug. I certainly have a few bones to pick with parts of it [mainly, I feel like the small changes and additions they made to the first movie started getting out of hand a bit here] but by and large it was a really fun experience. There was a little boy sitting behind us for both films and while he and his father spent the majority of the first up and about, it was super adorable to hear him asking his dad questions about the characters and the story. Happily, Tim survived work the next day. Surprisingly, he often does better on less than 6 hours of sleep than with 6 or more. Weird.
Some major brainstorming happened with my story yesterday and I am so stoked for the new ideas that have come into play. I have the tendency to get stuck when I write. Something isn't coming out on the page like I wanted it to, things feel disjointed and I'm not sure how to fix it, big questions are looming and I don't know how to answer them, etc. I've been dealing with all of these the last few weeks but last night, thanks to a fabulous friend and a wonderful husband, I think I made some breakthroughs.
I had decided on the general arc of the story, the main conflicts, etc. but I was running into difficulties because I want my characters to all be complex but I was clinging to my desire to write the story from one person's point of view. Now, it is very hard to convey the complexity of several characters if you're only seeing things through one person's eyes. This problem had left me at a standstill, grabbing at straws to try and invent ways to make each character's struggles more apparent and compelling. Every time someone asked me if I would be writing from multiple perspectives I would respond with a quick and definitive no that may or may not have made some people feel like they'd offended me at the suggestion. Tim told me something last night, though, that made me more open to considering an alternative.
Tim kept coming back and back to why I wanted to keep the perspective with one person. He told me that in all the big, acclaimed fantasy books, the story is never told from one person's perspective exclusively [yes, I'm sure there are some exceptions]. Very gently, he admitted that when I first explained my intentions to restrict my POV for the story, it immediately became an unimpressive YA fantasy novel in his head. While that admission stung just a little bit, it made me think. I have never strictly billed this story as a fantasy, but it does have a lot of things in common with that genre and the complexity of each character is one of those elements. I'm relatively new to the fantasy genre as a reader so I hadn't realized the perceived difference between stories written from one or multiple perspectives and, believe me, the last thing anyone sets out to do when they start to write is to create mediocre stories.
I had dug myself so far into my determination to have the story told by one character that I had never considered adding other perspectives as a means of solving many of my problems. But the more I'm thinking about it, the more things are clicking into place. By adding perspectives from three other characters, gaps that I was having difficulty filling are already being written in my head. The complexity of these characters will be visible and the intricacy that I'm trying to build into the plot will be more integrated now.
Guys. I'm seriously stoked about this.
So, moral of the story this week? If you're running into road blocks with your writing, try looking at things from different angles, even ones you never thought you'd use before. Try out different POVs, from different characters. Sometimes this may feel like it's adding a lot of work for you, and it does take time and you may not use all of what you write, but by exploring options you may keep yourself from asking "what if"s down the road. And if your experimenting reveals something that just makes everything click better, won't you be better off than if you tried forging ahead with something that didn't feel like it was working?
Writing is work - anyone who tells you differently is lying. But it should also be fun, a time and place where we can play with out imaginations. So have fun with it :)
Thursday, December 19, 2013
Thursday, December 12, 2013
a book review and other ramblings
On a recent trip to Barnes & Noble I caved and bought two books. Generally I try to keep my defenses up when I go to B&N because if I didn't I'd probably end up going into serious debt. It had been a while, though, so I decided to treat myself to something new in The Looking Glass Wars and Under My Hat: Tales From the Cauldron [an anthology of tales about witches and such].
I picked up Looking Glass Wars because I had heard a good deal about the series and I've developed a liking for most things Wonderland [Has anyone seen Phoebe in Wonderland? Awesome movie]. I really enjoyed the TV mini series "Alice" that aired a while ago as well as Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland so I figured Beddor's series would be a good pick.
While I can't say the book was terrible, because it wasn't, I was rather underwhelmed. The premise of telling the true story of Wonderland is one chock full of potential, most of which I didn't find to be realized. As one reviewer on Amazon wrote: "It's just that Beddor hasn't a clue who his audience is or where he wants to go with this series." This encapsulates how the book felt to me. As a new writer Beddor seems to have struggled with concrete world-building, designing a Wonderland that is fantastically advanced [all of our greatest inventions on Earth supposedly come from there] but at the same time historically quaint, which was hard for me to reconcile and really picture in my mind. Some of the terminology that Beddor invented also tripped me up a bit, again because I was trying to picture a fantastical Wonderland that also semi-resembled our, more demure world. It was hard for me to take some things seriously even though the characters took the existence of certain bizarre creatures and foods as a matter of course.
The feeling of the book kept oscillating between middle-grade and YA and I think the main cause for this confusion was the way Beddor approached and developed his characters. For the most part, I enjoyed all the characters. I think he created a good cast without any really unnecessary characters and there's something to be said for that. However, for me, a big difference between middle grade and YA is how in depth you get with characters, how intensely you feel their emotions and struggles. Beddor seems to have created YA worthy characters who hint at complex backgrounds, motives, and desires, but he treats them like middle-grade characters, only skimming the surface of their thoughts, actions, and feelings. I kept waiting to get more intimately involved in Alyss's grief over losing her parents and her world, her huge decision to shut that all away in order to survive on Earth, her reorientation to Wonderland, and how she finally accepted her role and strengthened herself to take back what is hers. There was just so much potential here for a truly compelling story with characters that you root for but, try as I did, I couldn't really get attached to the characters because it felt like Beddor just skimmed over everything. Nothing made me feel like the stakes were high or that characters were really struggling with their decisions, they just did 180s and moved on. Part of me wants to take this book and rewrite it, not to change the plot, just to flesh out the characters.
So I'm not really sure if I'll pick up the next two in the trilogy. I don't think I could read them if the characterization remains this two-dimensional.
In other news, Tim and I are going to the double feature for the new Hobbit release tonight. This will either be a wonderfully stupendous experience or a slightly suicidal one since we both still have to work tomorrow. The game plan is to go to bed once we get home and sleep for two hours in the hopes that we can mitigate the amount of sleep we'll be losing. I'll get back to you on whether that's effective or not.
In random-personal-experience-moment-of-the-day: It's amazing to me how many times personal trials have enabled me to connect with people who are struggling with the same thing. Most of the time these end up being struggles that are intensely personal for me and that I don't share with anyone aside from Tim. So this morning when a friend started telling me about something she recently learned and is struggling to figure out how to comes to terms with, I was blown away by how almost exactly similar her situation is to what I experienced about three years ago.
This was a topic that I had figured I would never talk to someone else about because you don't just start a conversation about that sort of thing but here I was, having found myself in a situation where this friend needed advice and assurances that most people wouldn't be able to give, but I could. I debated whether or not to tell her my experience because I could feasibly give appropriate advice without divulging my own story. But I could remember how much I would have appreciated someone telling me what I know now those three years ago and hearing it from someone who has been there - how things can work out - would have helped give me the strength and hope I may have felt I lacked.
I'm sorry if that made no sense to some of you, but I thought I'd share. It's such an amazing feeling and experience to see something that has been a trial for you turn into a positive influence for someone else.
I picked up Looking Glass Wars because I had heard a good deal about the series and I've developed a liking for most things Wonderland [Has anyone seen Phoebe in Wonderland? Awesome movie]. I really enjoyed the TV mini series "Alice" that aired a while ago as well as Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland so I figured Beddor's series would be a good pick.
While I can't say the book was terrible, because it wasn't, I was rather underwhelmed. The premise of telling the true story of Wonderland is one chock full of potential, most of which I didn't find to be realized. As one reviewer on Amazon wrote: "It's just that Beddor hasn't a clue who his audience is or where he wants to go with this series." This encapsulates how the book felt to me. As a new writer Beddor seems to have struggled with concrete world-building, designing a Wonderland that is fantastically advanced [all of our greatest inventions on Earth supposedly come from there] but at the same time historically quaint, which was hard for me to reconcile and really picture in my mind. Some of the terminology that Beddor invented also tripped me up a bit, again because I was trying to picture a fantastical Wonderland that also semi-resembled our, more demure world. It was hard for me to take some things seriously even though the characters took the existence of certain bizarre creatures and foods as a matter of course.
The feeling of the book kept oscillating between middle-grade and YA and I think the main cause for this confusion was the way Beddor approached and developed his characters. For the most part, I enjoyed all the characters. I think he created a good cast without any really unnecessary characters and there's something to be said for that. However, for me, a big difference between middle grade and YA is how in depth you get with characters, how intensely you feel their emotions and struggles. Beddor seems to have created YA worthy characters who hint at complex backgrounds, motives, and desires, but he treats them like middle-grade characters, only skimming the surface of their thoughts, actions, and feelings. I kept waiting to get more intimately involved in Alyss's grief over losing her parents and her world, her huge decision to shut that all away in order to survive on Earth, her reorientation to Wonderland, and how she finally accepted her role and strengthened herself to take back what is hers. There was just so much potential here for a truly compelling story with characters that you root for but, try as I did, I couldn't really get attached to the characters because it felt like Beddor just skimmed over everything. Nothing made me feel like the stakes were high or that characters were really struggling with their decisions, they just did 180s and moved on. Part of me wants to take this book and rewrite it, not to change the plot, just to flesh out the characters.
So I'm not really sure if I'll pick up the next two in the trilogy. I don't think I could read them if the characterization remains this two-dimensional.
In other news, Tim and I are going to the double feature for the new Hobbit release tonight. This will either be a wonderfully stupendous experience or a slightly suicidal one since we both still have to work tomorrow. The game plan is to go to bed once we get home and sleep for two hours in the hopes that we can mitigate the amount of sleep we'll be losing. I'll get back to you on whether that's effective or not.
In random-personal-experience-moment-of-the-day: It's amazing to me how many times personal trials have enabled me to connect with people who are struggling with the same thing. Most of the time these end up being struggles that are intensely personal for me and that I don't share with anyone aside from Tim. So this morning when a friend started telling me about something she recently learned and is struggling to figure out how to comes to terms with, I was blown away by how almost exactly similar her situation is to what I experienced about three years ago.
This was a topic that I had figured I would never talk to someone else about because you don't just start a conversation about that sort of thing but here I was, having found myself in a situation where this friend needed advice and assurances that most people wouldn't be able to give, but I could. I debated whether or not to tell her my experience because I could feasibly give appropriate advice without divulging my own story. But I could remember how much I would have appreciated someone telling me what I know now those three years ago and hearing it from someone who has been there - how things can work out - would have helped give me the strength and hope I may have felt I lacked.
I'm sorry if that made no sense to some of you, but I thought I'd share. It's such an amazing feeling and experience to see something that has been a trial for you turn into a positive influence for someone else.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
struggling to put thoughts into words
I know I don't usually use this blog for very introspective things and fear not, that's not changing. I was just trying to think of what to talk about this week and what came to mind isn't writing-oriented but I can't shake it tonight.
I typically stay out of discussions about various topics that are prevalent right now. This stems from personal ignorance [like with politics] as well as a desire to avoid offending others or just getting into angry yelling matches [as often seems to happen whenever religion is brought up]. To even say you're religious is to draw criticism much of the time, forget about identifying as a member of the LDS church [Mormons], so I usually keep my nose out of heated conversations.
I have a lot of friends who are not members of my faith and I love them all dearly. They're wonderful people that I'm blessed to know and I hope they've never felt that I've tried to impose my beliefs on them, as Christians are often accused, and sadly guilty of doing. When I think of these friends, I like to focus on what brought us together and the things we share rather than our differences, but sometimes I'm reminded just how differently we see the world.
With adults, sometimes all it takes is a difference of opinion to spell the end of a friendship but, aside from distancing myself from toxic relationships, I hope to never use that excuse. Not because I'm determined to "bring everyone to baptism" [though I wouldn't complain :P], but because I know my life would suffer for losing those people. The older I've gotten and the more I've come to understand and evaluate my own beliefs, the less these differences of opinion make me angry as sometimes happened when I was a teenager. I don't enjoy getting into shouting matches where each side is ignoring the other person's point of view. I don't like the feeling of anger that so often comes with the choice to be offended. Oddly enough, these differences make me sad, and I don't mean in a condescending way. My heart hurts.
I have seen so much pain, and struggle, and suffering happen in friends' lives that might have been different, better, more bearable if they knew what I know and saw the world the way I see it. I'll be the last Mormon to claim that my life is free of suffering because of the doctrine I believe in. While my life has not seen the hardships that many have had to endure, I have had, and continue to have my own trials - many of which have threatened my mental and emotional well-being in very real ways. No, struggles, and suffering, are a part of life. But when I look back on the things I've gone through and those of my friends, mine feel like they were less - not because they weren't hard, but because I see things differently and it is amazing how much perspective can change your trials without taking them away.
So many of these arguments that are taking place in our country, in our world, right now - the debates about abortion and gay marriage - I hesitate to join in because I feel like people aren't focusing on the central disagreement. How can I explain why I believe what I believe about these issues when your argument is based on one idea and mine is founded on something deeper that changes the context of the problem entirely? It is hard enough to communicate with someone who is willing to honestly listen to what you have to say, how much harder when you're almost talking about separate things? Perspective. So it's easy to get frustrated and upset when people broach these topics and you feel like they aren't listening. I just wish we knew better how to communicate.
Okay, that's it.
I typically stay out of discussions about various topics that are prevalent right now. This stems from personal ignorance [like with politics] as well as a desire to avoid offending others or just getting into angry yelling matches [as often seems to happen whenever religion is brought up]. To even say you're religious is to draw criticism much of the time, forget about identifying as a member of the LDS church [Mormons], so I usually keep my nose out of heated conversations.
I have a lot of friends who are not members of my faith and I love them all dearly. They're wonderful people that I'm blessed to know and I hope they've never felt that I've tried to impose my beliefs on them, as Christians are often accused, and sadly guilty of doing. When I think of these friends, I like to focus on what brought us together and the things we share rather than our differences, but sometimes I'm reminded just how differently we see the world.
With adults, sometimes all it takes is a difference of opinion to spell the end of a friendship but, aside from distancing myself from toxic relationships, I hope to never use that excuse. Not because I'm determined to "bring everyone to baptism" [though I wouldn't complain :P], but because I know my life would suffer for losing those people. The older I've gotten and the more I've come to understand and evaluate my own beliefs, the less these differences of opinion make me angry as sometimes happened when I was a teenager. I don't enjoy getting into shouting matches where each side is ignoring the other person's point of view. I don't like the feeling of anger that so often comes with the choice to be offended. Oddly enough, these differences make me sad, and I don't mean in a condescending way. My heart hurts.
I have seen so much pain, and struggle, and suffering happen in friends' lives that might have been different, better, more bearable if they knew what I know and saw the world the way I see it. I'll be the last Mormon to claim that my life is free of suffering because of the doctrine I believe in. While my life has not seen the hardships that many have had to endure, I have had, and continue to have my own trials - many of which have threatened my mental and emotional well-being in very real ways. No, struggles, and suffering, are a part of life. But when I look back on the things I've gone through and those of my friends, mine feel like they were less - not because they weren't hard, but because I see things differently and it is amazing how much perspective can change your trials without taking them away.
So many of these arguments that are taking place in our country, in our world, right now - the debates about abortion and gay marriage - I hesitate to join in because I feel like people aren't focusing on the central disagreement. How can I explain why I believe what I believe about these issues when your argument is based on one idea and mine is founded on something deeper that changes the context of the problem entirely? It is hard enough to communicate with someone who is willing to honestly listen to what you have to say, how much harder when you're almost talking about separate things? Perspective. So it's easy to get frustrated and upset when people broach these topics and you feel like they aren't listening. I just wish we knew better how to communicate.
Okay, that's it.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
suspension of disbelief, not all reason
Suspension of disbelief is an inherent part of genre fiction from fantasy to mystery. The term was originally coined in conjunction with the idea that if a writer could develop a sense of reality in setting and plot as well as humanity in characters, the reader would suspend judgement about the potential implausibility of the narrative. Over time the responsibility for suspension of disbelief has fallen largely on the reader instead of the writer.
Anyone who has read a book or watched a movie or TV show has been in a situation that requires this suspension of the implausible, though the degree to which one must stretch the suspension of judgement varies depending on the genre and the particular piece. Also, some people are more willing to suspend their disbelief to a greater degree than others. This can be a conscious choice or something that occurs because one person is more ignorant of facts that another.
For example: I am not an expert on space and astronauts. I do, however, have a fundamental understanding of some aspects of space, such as the lack of sound and gravity, how an extended stay in space will cause atrophy in ones muscles, etc. Considering these things, when I saw Gravity in theatres recently, I really enjoyed it. What I know as solid, factual things about space [such as the silence] were honored to my satisfaction and my ignorance about other things kept me from getting hung up on potentially problematic aspects of the film. On the other hand, we have Neil Degrasse Tyson who, while he gave the movie a positive review, apparently had a harder time not being pulled out of the narrative due to scientific mistakes that he, as the world-renowned scientist that he is, could easily identify.
Now, in writing, as in film, you are never going to be able to please everyone. There will always be someone there pointing out what you "got wrong" no matter how well you research or world-build. It doesn't mean you've done an awful job, nor does it meant that the readers should just swallow whatever you decide to invent. I disagree with the current trend that puts almost all of the responsibility of suspension on the reader/viewer. We are creators of these stories have a serious responsibility to our audiences to write stories with believable characters and with situations and plots that, while they may often be wonderfully fantastic in nature, can still pull a reader along without requiring them to throw all common sense out the window. Readers need to be willing to lay aside what they may take for granted, or assume is true about the world, especially in fiction and fantasy but we as writers cannot write a load of poppycock and expect readers to bear the entire burden of making it believable.
I have read plenty of books and seen plenty of movies where I felt the writers could have done a better job making the story and characters believable. I have also read and seen several where I recognized that my own knowledge of certain topics or my own stubbornness has gotten in the way of enjoying the work because I couldn't stop nit-picking. [This is always the case with movies made from books I've read. I cannot seem to get passed the incongruities no matter how hard I try. It's a serious problem :( ] Creators and consumers share this responsibility and if you are unsuccessful in suspending disbelief as a writer and/or reader, then at least be willing to accept your own short-comings. It's the only way you'll ever learn to improve. [I really am trying to like movies made from books, guys. I really am.]
As a writer, I'm perhaps overly critical of myself as well as other creators for failings in this department. Struggles and near-misses I can understand but this weekend I encountered an example so awful that it completely offended me. My husband has been playing the most recent Call of Duty and finished the campaign mode this weekend. I wasn't home when he got to the end but he told me that, while watching the closing scene, he had the distinct thought that it was a good thing I wasn't present to see it. [He knows my pet-peeves so well] This, of course led into a discussion of what had happened and I'll try to lay it out as well as I can remember for you. [I apologize in advance for any confusion. I'm not a video game connoisseur in my own right.]
The whole game, your character and his brother are hunting down an ex-member of their team who was lost and then turned against you. At the end of the game you have tracked him down and are fighting him on a train which ends up derailing and sinking into the ocean. As you sink, your brother gets the villain into a headlock and tells you to shoot him [the villain], which you do. Your gun is a .44 magnum, a very large caliber handgun which is [according to my husband] completely capable of shooting through the right side of the villain's chest, through your brother's shoulder, and through a window in the train, as it proceeds to do. As the train car fills with water you manage to grab your brother, who is injured, and make your way to the surface and the beach where you rest and contact people to come and get you.
After you have radioed in for pick up, the villain appears on the beach walking toward you. He proceeds to beat the snot out of you and your brother. The scene ends with him taunting you, telling you that you will be turned against your cause as he was and you'll become his partner in eeeeviiiiillllllll [dramatic emphasis added], and then dragging you away down the beach by your leg, your brother left behind, too injured to help you.
If the reasons for my outrage at this are unclear, bear with me as I list them.
1. If you were shot through the lung while inside a sinking train car, you would not survive.
2. Barring that, if you managed to get out of the car and onto land, you could not be in any condition to walk anywhere and would most likely bleed to death.
3. Barring that, if you could survive the death trap and your body was able to push through the pain and damage of a collapsed lung, you would not win in a fight against two people who have survived the same death trap and are less injured than you.
4. Barring that, if you managed to beat those two up, you are attempting to drag away the less injured of the two by his leg which allows him his other leg as well as both arms to put up any kind of fight [which the character does not do in the game].
5. Barring that, if you were able to drag the character away, before you arrived they had contacted people to get them and when they show up the brother will tell them what happened and these people who have managed to track you across the globe the entire game will track you down again, get the character back, and kill you even if it requires cutting your head off and burning your remains.
6. Barring that, if you get away with the character and no one catches you, this character knows what happened to you, the torture and mind games that were used to break you and turn you "to the dark side." The most effective defense against torture and brain washing is knowing what your captors are trying to accomplish by it. From what you know of the character, he would die before he broke and turned on his family and his cause.
For these reasons, this has got to be one of the most obnoxious endings I have ever heard of. The fact that the developers of this game thought this was an acceptable ending and that it would be at all believable is downright offensive to all of my sensibilities as a creator and a consumer. How stupid do they think their audience is that they think this would be viewed without complaint? Apparently these games have tended more and more toward dramatic endings as they've gone on, which is fine, but this is not dramatic. This is preposterous.
Please, please, please do not do this with your writing. You deserve better, your characters deserve better, and your reader certainly deserves more respect than that.
Anyone who has read a book or watched a movie or TV show has been in a situation that requires this suspension of the implausible, though the degree to which one must stretch the suspension of judgement varies depending on the genre and the particular piece. Also, some people are more willing to suspend their disbelief to a greater degree than others. This can be a conscious choice or something that occurs because one person is more ignorant of facts that another.
For example: I am not an expert on space and astronauts. I do, however, have a fundamental understanding of some aspects of space, such as the lack of sound and gravity, how an extended stay in space will cause atrophy in ones muscles, etc. Considering these things, when I saw Gravity in theatres recently, I really enjoyed it. What I know as solid, factual things about space [such as the silence] were honored to my satisfaction and my ignorance about other things kept me from getting hung up on potentially problematic aspects of the film. On the other hand, we have Neil Degrasse Tyson who, while he gave the movie a positive review, apparently had a harder time not being pulled out of the narrative due to scientific mistakes that he, as the world-renowned scientist that he is, could easily identify.
Now, in writing, as in film, you are never going to be able to please everyone. There will always be someone there pointing out what you "got wrong" no matter how well you research or world-build. It doesn't mean you've done an awful job, nor does it meant that the readers should just swallow whatever you decide to invent. I disagree with the current trend that puts almost all of the responsibility of suspension on the reader/viewer. We are creators of these stories have a serious responsibility to our audiences to write stories with believable characters and with situations and plots that, while they may often be wonderfully fantastic in nature, can still pull a reader along without requiring them to throw all common sense out the window. Readers need to be willing to lay aside what they may take for granted, or assume is true about the world, especially in fiction and fantasy but we as writers cannot write a load of poppycock and expect readers to bear the entire burden of making it believable.
I have read plenty of books and seen plenty of movies where I felt the writers could have done a better job making the story and characters believable. I have also read and seen several where I recognized that my own knowledge of certain topics or my own stubbornness has gotten in the way of enjoying the work because I couldn't stop nit-picking. [This is always the case with movies made from books I've read. I cannot seem to get passed the incongruities no matter how hard I try. It's a serious problem :( ] Creators and consumers share this responsibility and if you are unsuccessful in suspending disbelief as a writer and/or reader, then at least be willing to accept your own short-comings. It's the only way you'll ever learn to improve. [I really am trying to like movies made from books, guys. I really am.]
As a writer, I'm perhaps overly critical of myself as well as other creators for failings in this department. Struggles and near-misses I can understand but this weekend I encountered an example so awful that it completely offended me. My husband has been playing the most recent Call of Duty and finished the campaign mode this weekend. I wasn't home when he got to the end but he told me that, while watching the closing scene, he had the distinct thought that it was a good thing I wasn't present to see it. [He knows my pet-peeves so well] This, of course led into a discussion of what had happened and I'll try to lay it out as well as I can remember for you. [I apologize in advance for any confusion. I'm not a video game connoisseur in my own right.]
The whole game, your character and his brother are hunting down an ex-member of their team who was lost and then turned against you. At the end of the game you have tracked him down and are fighting him on a train which ends up derailing and sinking into the ocean. As you sink, your brother gets the villain into a headlock and tells you to shoot him [the villain], which you do. Your gun is a .44 magnum, a very large caliber handgun which is [according to my husband] completely capable of shooting through the right side of the villain's chest, through your brother's shoulder, and through a window in the train, as it proceeds to do. As the train car fills with water you manage to grab your brother, who is injured, and make your way to the surface and the beach where you rest and contact people to come and get you.
After you have radioed in for pick up, the villain appears on the beach walking toward you. He proceeds to beat the snot out of you and your brother. The scene ends with him taunting you, telling you that you will be turned against your cause as he was and you'll become his partner in eeeeviiiiillllllll [dramatic emphasis added], and then dragging you away down the beach by your leg, your brother left behind, too injured to help you.
If the reasons for my outrage at this are unclear, bear with me as I list them.
1. If you were shot through the lung while inside a sinking train car, you would not survive.
2. Barring that, if you managed to get out of the car and onto land, you could not be in any condition to walk anywhere and would most likely bleed to death.
3. Barring that, if you could survive the death trap and your body was able to push through the pain and damage of a collapsed lung, you would not win in a fight against two people who have survived the same death trap and are less injured than you.
4. Barring that, if you managed to beat those two up, you are attempting to drag away the less injured of the two by his leg which allows him his other leg as well as both arms to put up any kind of fight [which the character does not do in the game].
5. Barring that, if you were able to drag the character away, before you arrived they had contacted people to get them and when they show up the brother will tell them what happened and these people who have managed to track you across the globe the entire game will track you down again, get the character back, and kill you even if it requires cutting your head off and burning your remains.
6. Barring that, if you get away with the character and no one catches you, this character knows what happened to you, the torture and mind games that were used to break you and turn you "to the dark side." The most effective defense against torture and brain washing is knowing what your captors are trying to accomplish by it. From what you know of the character, he would die before he broke and turned on his family and his cause.
For these reasons, this has got to be one of the most obnoxious endings I have ever heard of. The fact that the developers of this game thought this was an acceptable ending and that it would be at all believable is downright offensive to all of my sensibilities as a creator and a consumer. How stupid do they think their audience is that they think this would be viewed without complaint? Apparently these games have tended more and more toward dramatic endings as they've gone on, which is fine, but this is not dramatic. This is preposterous.
Please, please, please do not do this with your writing. You deserve better, your characters deserve better, and your reader certainly deserves more respect than that.
Thursday, November 21, 2013
restlessness, cold, and a satisfactory rebuttal
Have you ever looked around your house and decided you hate half the things in it and want to either throw those things out or just set them on fire? I was struck by this desire last night as I looked around our living room with its horrendously mis-matched couches [yay hand-me-downs!], make-shift tv stand, and general clutter. I started out trying to figure out where we would set up our Christmas tree when the time comes and ended up wanting to cart most of the room to the dumpster. I settled for a little bit of cleaning and rearranging.
Don't get me wrong, I know we are very blessed to have the furniture we do considering it hasn't put us in debt and the pieces are functional. Sometimes I just get fits of aesthetic dissatisfaction that make me long for a day when we have a home with matching furniture tastefully arranged in relation to the available space. I suppose it's a good thing for me that Thanksgiving is next week so I can force myself to remember all the important things I have in my life and resist the urge to go into unnecessary debt in order to obtain an ideal that isn't important.
This is how I've been feeling in the mornings:
In all seriousness, though, our heater hardly ever turns on and it is still roasting in our apartment by the end of the day. Our downstairs neighbors must have their heat cranked and they're more than welcome to keep paying for our heat in my opinion.
It can still be more of a struggle to get out of bed in the winter so I bribed myself with 20 minutes at a library book sale before work to get up yesterday. Anyone who has ever been to such an event knows that there is very little organization involved so I was pretty pleased to snag a Calvin and Hobbes that we didn't have yet as well as the third book in the Hollow Kingdom trilogy. I even managed to enjoy the irony that that's now the one book I own of the three and it is my least favorite. Maybe I can convince Tim to buy the first and second for me for Christmas... I hate having an incomplete set.
I have long been aware of the high-brow/low-brow line drawn between literary fiction and genre fiction. It's an argument I completely disagree with the critics on and generally stay out of because the level of sheer snobbery that can come into those conversations is stifling. I'm comfortable with writing what I like and ignoring whether or not someone is going to think it's ground-breaking but I was recently made aware of an article that attacks [yes, I say attacks] Mormon writers specifically and claims that we as a group are incapable of writing "good" literature because we tend to write genre fiction. I was torn between disbelief and indignant anger by the end of the article for so many reasons that I can't coherently list. However, a friend wrote a wonderful post in response to this article that articulates my feelings almost exactly. You can read it, and get a link to the original article, here. I highly recommend it. The current trend of placing post-modern, literary fiction at the top of the writing totem pole isn't permanent, as none of the hierarchies before it have been permanent and I for one cannot wait until people figure out that genre fiction, as well as Mormon writers, have a lot more depth to offer than they're being credited for right now.
It frustrates me to think about the number of people who may never have tried to follow their writing dreams because someone told them they weren't "qualified" to be a writer. The idea that you have to have had an unhappy childhood in order to convey a true sense of pain, loss, suffering, and struggle as a writer is completely preposterous. The wonderful thing about writing fiction is that you don't have to have experienced everything your characters do yourself. If you did, imagination would be useless and unnecessary and it would be a sadder world for that. A true writer is not necessarily someone who has been abused and mistreated and embittered, but a person who has the capability of taking the emotions they have felt and building on them, extrapolating them out into different situations and contexts that they've never lived but are made to feel real because they are founded in real emotion. Everyone has felt the range of human emotions, we are all able to convey sadness and joy. Don't let anyone tell you differently.
Don't get me wrong, I know we are very blessed to have the furniture we do considering it hasn't put us in debt and the pieces are functional. Sometimes I just get fits of aesthetic dissatisfaction that make me long for a day when we have a home with matching furniture tastefully arranged in relation to the available space. I suppose it's a good thing for me that Thanksgiving is next week so I can force myself to remember all the important things I have in my life and resist the urge to go into unnecessary debt in order to obtain an ideal that isn't important.
This is how I've been feeling in the mornings:
In all seriousness, though, our heater hardly ever turns on and it is still roasting in our apartment by the end of the day. Our downstairs neighbors must have their heat cranked and they're more than welcome to keep paying for our heat in my opinion.
It can still be more of a struggle to get out of bed in the winter so I bribed myself with 20 minutes at a library book sale before work to get up yesterday. Anyone who has ever been to such an event knows that there is very little organization involved so I was pretty pleased to snag a Calvin and Hobbes that we didn't have yet as well as the third book in the Hollow Kingdom trilogy. I even managed to enjoy the irony that that's now the one book I own of the three and it is my least favorite. Maybe I can convince Tim to buy the first and second for me for Christmas... I hate having an incomplete set.
I have long been aware of the high-brow/low-brow line drawn between literary fiction and genre fiction. It's an argument I completely disagree with the critics on and generally stay out of because the level of sheer snobbery that can come into those conversations is stifling. I'm comfortable with writing what I like and ignoring whether or not someone is going to think it's ground-breaking but I was recently made aware of an article that attacks [yes, I say attacks] Mormon writers specifically and claims that we as a group are incapable of writing "good" literature because we tend to write genre fiction. I was torn between disbelief and indignant anger by the end of the article for so many reasons that I can't coherently list. However, a friend wrote a wonderful post in response to this article that articulates my feelings almost exactly. You can read it, and get a link to the original article, here. I highly recommend it. The current trend of placing post-modern, literary fiction at the top of the writing totem pole isn't permanent, as none of the hierarchies before it have been permanent and I for one cannot wait until people figure out that genre fiction, as well as Mormon writers, have a lot more depth to offer than they're being credited for right now.
It frustrates me to think about the number of people who may never have tried to follow their writing dreams because someone told them they weren't "qualified" to be a writer. The idea that you have to have had an unhappy childhood in order to convey a true sense of pain, loss, suffering, and struggle as a writer is completely preposterous. The wonderful thing about writing fiction is that you don't have to have experienced everything your characters do yourself. If you did, imagination would be useless and unnecessary and it would be a sadder world for that. A true writer is not necessarily someone who has been abused and mistreated and embittered, but a person who has the capability of taking the emotions they have felt and building on them, extrapolating them out into different situations and contexts that they've never lived but are made to feel real because they are founded in real emotion. Everyone has felt the range of human emotions, we are all able to convey sadness and joy. Don't let anyone tell you differently.
Thursday, November 14, 2013
it's only november but...
The holidays are fast approaching, whether we want them to or not!
Gift giving has always been a point of mild anxiety for me because I can be super particular about the gifts I get for people. They have to be just right. Since knowing Tim, my stress level about Christmas and birthdays has gone way up from pure desire to please. I've been lucky though. My husband is really pretty easy to shop for. He actually wants things and talks about them so all I have to do is pay attention and mentally note anything he seems really interested in. This has made things easier for me, whereas he's stuck getting presents for the girl-who-doesn't-ever-voice-a-preference-for-anything.
One problem I've started running into, though, is that when Tim wants something, or gets excited about a game, he wants it now so I get to play a delicate game of sounding interested when he talks about it but not too interested otherwise he'll get it before Christmas. This issue has come up again this year as there are a few games coming out next year that he's geeking out over. I had fully intended on surprising him with one for Christmas but I finally caved last night when he asked, for the hundreth time - joking but not, if I was okay with him pre-ordering it. Sigh. One Christmas option down, hopefully I can hang on to the other ideas I have, haha.
In other news, I managed to sneak another book in amid my Wheel of Time marathon. I borrowed River Secrets from my sister-in-law's friend [practically forced to since she saw me ogling her bookshelves] as I lost my university library privileges before I could get my hands on the third book of this wonderful series. Anyone who's read this blog before knows that I am a huge Shannon Hale fan. I keep finding more and more things to admire about her work and I hope that doesn't end soon.
I was a little hesitant to start River Secrets as I had enjoyed but didn't love Enna Burning and I was somewhat worried that the series would continue downhill for me. I shouldn't have worried. River Secrets is probably my favorite book in the series now. This book made me laugh out loud more times than I can remember from pure humor and witty surprise. Hale's whimsical and quirky narration is a strong presence and makes what could have been an average story wonderful to read. Razo wasn't a character I really attached to in the first two books but I was excited to see how much he grew on me and quickly became my favorite character out of the bunch.
There have been a lot of articles and blogs talking about the female stereotypes in literature and I have no qualms with the issues they raise, for the most part they are completely valid, but I think that male characters suffer from their own gender stereotypes pretty frequently. I think the main reason the majority of my book collection is composed of heroines instead of heroes is because I get tired of these overworked molds - the hero who is perfect in every virtue, especially humility and a lack of desire for personal glory - the anti-hero who broods over everything and doesn't want to take responsibility but suddenly discovers that he's actually a wonderful person - the macho hero who thinks only in terms of physical force to get things done but it's okay because it's not malicious and it's all in the name of justice! There are many many others but we see them over and over again in literature. This doesn't necessarily mean they're bad. They all have their place but I get tired of them and this is why Razo was so fascinating to me.
A lot of things automatically set Razo apart from major male stereotypes. The most noticeable is his stature, or lack thereof. Heroes in this genre tend toward the large and powerful type or the strong silent type. Razo defies both categories with his good-humored, self-depreciating approach to his size as well as his constant stream of random dialogue and jokes. He's a class clown minus obnoxious shows of bravado. Razo does attempt bravado at times but his personality and lack of experience with tact and women always end up making the situation relatably and humorously awkward. Razo is the kind of character you want to like, that you cheer for. He's much more relatable in his imperfections than other character types and his part in the plot plays on the fact that he's not who you would pick out to be a leader or a hero. All in all, Razo was a refreshing hero and one that I am eager to add to my bookshelves. Maybe I should just give Tim my Amazon wish list...
Last bit for today: if you haven't seen Despicable Me 2, you definitely should. Tim and I made a random date night of going to see it in the Dollar Theatre yesterday and we were not disappointed. Good clean laughs abound and my favorites came from Margo's crush on a charming, dark, exotic, skater/emo boy which completely encapsulated the kinds of infatuations that come with young adolescence. I completely lost it at one point when Margo, totally smitten, tells him "you're so complicated." Honestly, that line keeps popping into my head and I crack up every time because it is so perfect!
Gift giving has always been a point of mild anxiety for me because I can be super particular about the gifts I get for people. They have to be just right. Since knowing Tim, my stress level about Christmas and birthdays has gone way up from pure desire to please. I've been lucky though. My husband is really pretty easy to shop for. He actually wants things and talks about them so all I have to do is pay attention and mentally note anything he seems really interested in. This has made things easier for me, whereas he's stuck getting presents for the girl-who-doesn't-ever-voice-a-preference-for-anything.
One problem I've started running into, though, is that when Tim wants something, or gets excited about a game, he wants it now so I get to play a delicate game of sounding interested when he talks about it but not too interested otherwise he'll get it before Christmas. This issue has come up again this year as there are a few games coming out next year that he's geeking out over. I had fully intended on surprising him with one for Christmas but I finally caved last night when he asked, for the hundreth time - joking but not, if I was okay with him pre-ordering it. Sigh. One Christmas option down, hopefully I can hang on to the other ideas I have, haha.
In other news, I managed to sneak another book in amid my Wheel of Time marathon. I borrowed River Secrets from my sister-in-law's friend [practically forced to since she saw me ogling her bookshelves] as I lost my university library privileges before I could get my hands on the third book of this wonderful series. Anyone who's read this blog before knows that I am a huge Shannon Hale fan. I keep finding more and more things to admire about her work and I hope that doesn't end soon.
I was a little hesitant to start River Secrets as I had enjoyed but didn't love Enna Burning and I was somewhat worried that the series would continue downhill for me. I shouldn't have worried. River Secrets is probably my favorite book in the series now. This book made me laugh out loud more times than I can remember from pure humor and witty surprise. Hale's whimsical and quirky narration is a strong presence and makes what could have been an average story wonderful to read. Razo wasn't a character I really attached to in the first two books but I was excited to see how much he grew on me and quickly became my favorite character out of the bunch.
There have been a lot of articles and blogs talking about the female stereotypes in literature and I have no qualms with the issues they raise, for the most part they are completely valid, but I think that male characters suffer from their own gender stereotypes pretty frequently. I think the main reason the majority of my book collection is composed of heroines instead of heroes is because I get tired of these overworked molds - the hero who is perfect in every virtue, especially humility and a lack of desire for personal glory - the anti-hero who broods over everything and doesn't want to take responsibility but suddenly discovers that he's actually a wonderful person - the macho hero who thinks only in terms of physical force to get things done but it's okay because it's not malicious and it's all in the name of justice! There are many many others but we see them over and over again in literature. This doesn't necessarily mean they're bad. They all have their place but I get tired of them and this is why Razo was so fascinating to me.
A lot of things automatically set Razo apart from major male stereotypes. The most noticeable is his stature, or lack thereof. Heroes in this genre tend toward the large and powerful type or the strong silent type. Razo defies both categories with his good-humored, self-depreciating approach to his size as well as his constant stream of random dialogue and jokes. He's a class clown minus obnoxious shows of bravado. Razo does attempt bravado at times but his personality and lack of experience with tact and women always end up making the situation relatably and humorously awkward. Razo is the kind of character you want to like, that you cheer for. He's much more relatable in his imperfections than other character types and his part in the plot plays on the fact that he's not who you would pick out to be a leader or a hero. All in all, Razo was a refreshing hero and one that I am eager to add to my bookshelves. Maybe I should just give Tim my Amazon wish list...
Last bit for today: if you haven't seen Despicable Me 2, you definitely should. Tim and I made a random date night of going to see it in the Dollar Theatre yesterday and we were not disappointed. Good clean laughs abound and my favorites came from Margo's crush on a charming, dark, exotic, skater/emo boy which completely encapsulated the kinds of infatuations that come with young adolescence. I completely lost it at one point when Margo, totally smitten, tells him "you're so complicated." Honestly, that line keeps popping into my head and I crack up every time because it is so perfect!
Thursday, November 7, 2013
november is a jerk - and other random thoughts
I've decided that whenever I have my own house I want bookshelves to be one of the first things visitors see upon arriving. I'm sure I'll go through lots of decoration ideas and my own funky version of feng shui with furniture and layouts but bookshelves will be a must. You can generally tell a lot about someone when you first walk into their house and I love the feeling when I go over to someone else's place and see bookshelves stuffed full fit to bursting with books. Even if I don't know the titles on them or have a particular fondness for ones I do. Books have a way of making a home feel more welcome and cozy. But maybe that's just me, haha.
It's already the seventh of November and I can't believe it. It's honestly like October didn't even happen. Part of me wishes I'd tackled NaNoWriMo this year but 50,000 words in a month seemed a little to ambitious with where my story currently stands. Some people can just write away without creating a framework first, of any kind, and I am in awe of those writers but that's not really me, not at this point anyway.
Which begs a question. I know that, as writers, our procedures and styles will change a little over the years as we grow into our craft and our voices but how much change really occurs? Has anyone ever started out as a super structured writer and then shifted to a more free-flowing, spontaneous style of writing? I think sometimes we aspire to be a certain kind of writer, from one of these schools of thought or one of the countless in between. Can we teach ourselves to write a certain way. I mean, to make that form of writing feel natural for us. Even if order and planning isn't our natural strong-suit, could we practice long enough that writing with that kind of discipline feels more natural, comfortable, and inspiring that anything else? I'm not sure. I think one of the hardest things is to find what your natural style and pace is. None of them are bad but you need to know what your groove is before you can get it on.
I don't think I've nailed down my writing style to a tee yet but I know certain things like: I write better on paper than a word processor and I usually need an environment with minimal distractions directed at me at least to get started. You'd think I would have realized stuff like this right off but I can't tell you how many times I have tried to make myself write on a word processor instead of by hand, largely because, for whatever reason, I though that was the "better" way to do it. Don't get me wrong, word processors are amazing and once I have a first draft of something I'm happy with I'll take it to the computer [esp. Ommwriter] but there's just something about doing the roughest rough draft long hand that I connect better with. The thing to remember, if you're working on your style, is that there is no "better." I have read a lot of interviews and articles about big name authors and how they go about their writing process and each is so unique. Some I honestly don't understand how they could possibly be helpful or productive but it works for them. So if trying to arrange the "perfect" writing procedure is keeping you from writing then maybe it's time to take a break and just try it however you feel comfortable. No one's watching you :)
In other random news, I've decided to try yoga in the mornings in an effort to put some semblance of physical activity into my life. A friend recommended a youtube channel done by a woman who's not the creepy-intense kind of yogi and I tried a few videos for the first time yesterday. I felt pretty silly sitting on my living room floor and doing stretches and such but it felt good to be doing something. It's too early to tell if this new morning routine will have that much of an impact on my physical well being but I feel a little less guilty for being genetically twiggy if I'm not just sitting around my house.
Isn't it interesting how different people have such different reactions to the same thing? You could collect a room full of girls with my body type and I know that each of us would feel differently about it. Some may never have really thought about how genetics have blessed them while others might be upfront in gloating about it and showing off their effortless figures. I would be in the weird group of girls who feel almost apologetic for what they couldn't help but inherit from their parents. I can't tell you how many times I have censured myself in conversations with other people because I though that something I might say could potentially offend someone because it came from a skinny girl. I suppose high school has that sort of conditioning effect, the place where girls learn to be harsh and disapproving of anyone - how to give and assume offense in the weirdest places. Girls that are naturally skinny may not have to worry about exercising to moderate their weight but they run the risk of offending people just by being what they are as much as girls who struggle with their weight feel they do. That, right there, is something I would never have said in high school. My point [you didn't think I had one, did you?] is that it is utterly fascinating how one actuality, problem, or trigger can result in a myriad of reactions and some more complex than you might think.
Think about how you react to certain things in your life. Why do you react that way? How do your characters react to things? Do their reactions feel real and specific to them with all their complexities? When people talk about how important it is to build your character's background even if none of it is in the story, this is what it's for. So you know how they will respond to different things and why, how their history makes their responses unique and maybe even somewhat unpredictable.
It's already the seventh of November and I can't believe it. It's honestly like October didn't even happen. Part of me wishes I'd tackled NaNoWriMo this year but 50,000 words in a month seemed a little to ambitious with where my story currently stands. Some people can just write away without creating a framework first, of any kind, and I am in awe of those writers but that's not really me, not at this point anyway.
Which begs a question. I know that, as writers, our procedures and styles will change a little over the years as we grow into our craft and our voices but how much change really occurs? Has anyone ever started out as a super structured writer and then shifted to a more free-flowing, spontaneous style of writing? I think sometimes we aspire to be a certain kind of writer, from one of these schools of thought or one of the countless in between. Can we teach ourselves to write a certain way. I mean, to make that form of writing feel natural for us. Even if order and planning isn't our natural strong-suit, could we practice long enough that writing with that kind of discipline feels more natural, comfortable, and inspiring that anything else? I'm not sure. I think one of the hardest things is to find what your natural style and pace is. None of them are bad but you need to know what your groove is before you can get it on.
I don't think I've nailed down my writing style to a tee yet but I know certain things like: I write better on paper than a word processor and I usually need an environment with minimal distractions directed at me at least to get started. You'd think I would have realized stuff like this right off but I can't tell you how many times I have tried to make myself write on a word processor instead of by hand, largely because, for whatever reason, I though that was the "better" way to do it. Don't get me wrong, word processors are amazing and once I have a first draft of something I'm happy with I'll take it to the computer [esp. Ommwriter] but there's just something about doing the roughest rough draft long hand that I connect better with. The thing to remember, if you're working on your style, is that there is no "better." I have read a lot of interviews and articles about big name authors and how they go about their writing process and each is so unique. Some I honestly don't understand how they could possibly be helpful or productive but it works for them. So if trying to arrange the "perfect" writing procedure is keeping you from writing then maybe it's time to take a break and just try it however you feel comfortable. No one's watching you :)
In other random news, I've decided to try yoga in the mornings in an effort to put some semblance of physical activity into my life. A friend recommended a youtube channel done by a woman who's not the creepy-intense kind of yogi and I tried a few videos for the first time yesterday. I felt pretty silly sitting on my living room floor and doing stretches and such but it felt good to be doing something. It's too early to tell if this new morning routine will have that much of an impact on my physical well being but I feel a little less guilty for being genetically twiggy if I'm not just sitting around my house.
Isn't it interesting how different people have such different reactions to the same thing? You could collect a room full of girls with my body type and I know that each of us would feel differently about it. Some may never have really thought about how genetics have blessed them while others might be upfront in gloating about it and showing off their effortless figures. I would be in the weird group of girls who feel almost apologetic for what they couldn't help but inherit from their parents. I can't tell you how many times I have censured myself in conversations with other people because I though that something I might say could potentially offend someone because it came from a skinny girl. I suppose high school has that sort of conditioning effect, the place where girls learn to be harsh and disapproving of anyone - how to give and assume offense in the weirdest places. Girls that are naturally skinny may not have to worry about exercising to moderate their weight but they run the risk of offending people just by being what they are as much as girls who struggle with their weight feel they do. That, right there, is something I would never have said in high school. My point [you didn't think I had one, did you?] is that it is utterly fascinating how one actuality, problem, or trigger can result in a myriad of reactions and some more complex than you might think.
Think about how you react to certain things in your life. Why do you react that way? How do your characters react to things? Do their reactions feel real and specific to them with all their complexities? When people talk about how important it is to build your character's background even if none of it is in the story, this is what it's for. So you know how they will respond to different things and why, how their history makes their responses unique and maybe even somewhat unpredictable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)