Rockets and Dragons

A Little Foreign Recognition

2012-01-18T19:40:00.002-06:00

The down side to going on strike is that one is almost honor bound to cough up a new post after the strike is over or the strike doesn't mean anything. Fortunately, something interesting and writing related happened to me last week.

Nearly two decades ago, I had three stories published in PLOT magazine, in each in the first three issues: Code of the Jenri, Cauchemar and Windrider. Not long after that, the magazine went defunct (I think they had two or maybe three more issues after the last one I was in). Back when I was trying to find different writing communities, I tried Helium.com. I didn't like it because you couldn't remove your work on there once you put it on and, although you got feedback (as in rankings) there were other issues with how things worked. You really lost control over what you put there. Unfortunately, I didn't figure this out until I'd reposted Windrider there and a poem, The Siren. Ironically, they've done fairly well in the rankings since I abandoned them.

Anyway, imagine my surprise when I receive this in my email inbox (names removed to protect both innocent and guilty):

Hello,

My name is XXXXXX. Im studying at a high school in Denmark. We are working with your short story "Windrider". Can you maybe tell me, which role does Venetia and Rene play in this story? And what is your main point with this short story?

Thank you!

XXXXXX

Now, note what's cool about this. Not only did someone see my story and track me down across the ocean, but it's apparently being taught in a high school in Denmark. How freaking cool is that? Of course, I'm flattered that they thought contacting me on-line would be easier than reading the story and figuring it out for themselves (though, of course, one must remember, this would be English as a second language). It was a real thrill.

But I know what you really want to ask. Did I give him the answer he wanted?

Hello, XXXXXX,

I am sufficiently impressed that you tracked me down given that my name has changed since this story was published more than a decade ago. Kudos to you.

I have to admit to curiousity how my story became part of the curriculum overseas, but I can't help but be gratified. I'd be interested in corresponding with your teacher to find out more. I'm not upset; quite the contrary. Anything I can do to help.

As for your specific questions, I'm not the sort of person who would tell you the answers to questions you were undoubtedly asked to provide yourself by reading the story; however, if you'd like to discuss aspects of the story with me, what you think and why and get my take on it, I'd be happy to give you my own opinions in answer to yours. It's a story I'm quite fond of.

Cordially,

Stephanie Barr

Sorry, XXXXXX. Too many teachers in my family for me to give the answers away.

On Strike

2012-01-18T09:06:00.002-06:00

Today, we are striking against censorship

Join the largest online protest in history: tell Congress to stop this bill now!

Join The Strike!

Learning from Love - part one

2011-12-27T20:17:00.000-06:00

So the word on my Rocket Scientist blog is, though I truly thought I had found my soulmate and loved him, heart and soul, only to be left with a shrug on his part for someone else (two days before my birthday, I might add, with no warning), I'm still qualified to write about love in my novels.

Which is good because it's a big part of all the books I've written and all the books I'd planned to write. But I can learn from this rather humiliating episode in my life to make my books better, more realistic, more powerful, even more romantic (without, I hope, being corny)?

Not sure yet. Hard to write at the moment which is why my blogs have been largely languishing.But can't let that go indefinitely, so here's today's questions, inspired by my having to deal with an "other" woman, for anyone who'd care to comment.

Jealousy is a big thing in many romantic stories, considered proof of caring. On the other hand, loving someone (by my own definition), puts their needs beyond your own. I have not done romantic triangles (or any other geometric shape) to date, but that might come not too far in the future. So, at what point does jealousy stop being about love and start being about ownership? Should you give away the one you love without protest if they truly love someone else? Are the two perspectives mutually incompatible?

And that brings up a side question. If we presume (and I do) that loving someone does not imply obligation on the someone's part, what does it say about an individual if they let the lack of return love (or falling out of love) corrupt the original love. Should anyone base one's love on what they wanted in return? Should it warp if the love is unrequited?

I will tell you how I see the answers to these questions in a later post, but, for now, I'd like to see your own responses. The floor is yours.

Update on the Good News

2011-12-15T21:49:00.000-06:00

Remember when I said my story was going to be published in the winter version of SQ Magazine? Well, apparently, now it's going to be different. Not long after what I thought was going to be the issue they were discussing went on sale, I received and email that said (in part):

I am writing to you because your story won a prize, or was short listed, in the Story Quest Short Story Contest, and part of the arrangement was that your story would be published in SQ Magazine.

This is still the case.

However, IFWG Publishing is pleased to announce that we have decided to 'up the ante' with regard to our magazine publishing, and therefore your short stories will be part of this experience – and definitely benefit.

Currently, SQ Magazine is a print (and ebook) speculative fiction publication, published twice a year and containing roughly 100 print pages in each edition - and something like 12 to 14 short stories. We are proud of what we have achieved in our first three editions, but we have decided to move to a completely different format, not unlike many other top grade publications over recent years. We will now publish as follows:

1. We will be a free online zine, published six times a year.
2. We will publish three to nine stories in each edition (more toward the latter, meaning, we will publish something like double the number of short stories than our current arrangement, per year).
3. At the end of each calendar year, we will choose the best stories, and publish them as a print and ebook anthology - usually around March of the following year.
4. At this stage, our efforts will still be 'for exposure' by authors - the economics can have it no other way, but as our advertising, donations, and side-enterprises increase revenue, we will follow it through to future writers.

This arrangement will take place from what would have been SQ Magazine #4 - in March 2012 (that is, editions from then on are online zines and will be published every two months). This changes our print schedule of Dec 2011/Jan 2012 to online on 1 March 2012. Our magazine will then be called 'SQ Mag'.

How does this affect you? Well, firstly, your work will get much more exposure probably from day one, and secondly, you will have a chance at having your work published in an anthology. The first part is entirely consistent with what the contest rules stipulated - it's just that the medium has changed. The second part is a bonus for you.

Thought I'd inform those interested. When I see it in e-print or real print, I will bring it to your attention with links.

Just a Bit of Good News

2011-11-15T20:35:00.001-06:00

After a hiatus nearly as long as my eldest daughter's life, I'm going to be in print again with a fiction. At the prompting of my sister, the redoubtable Shakespeare, I entered a short story contest with Story Quest Magazine. Admittedly, I haven't been writing many short stories, recently, but I had been going through the ones I had trying to spiff 'em up a little. And the "speculative" part of the contest was right up my alley.

Well, I didn't win, but one of my stories did make it as a finalist and will be published in this winter's issue of SQ Magazine, so cool beans for me.

Feel free to get yourself a copy (I presume all the finalists and winners will be in there). I'll be doing the same.

Never Too Old To Learn

2011-11-08T18:41:00.002-06:00

Tired of squirming yet? I know, for many people, the whole topic ("boys love") is pretty squirmy. I think that's one reason I jumped on it. Topics that make us uncomfortable, that make us squirm, as it were, are too often glossed over or ignored, leaving them open for ridicule, stigmatizing, indifference, stereotyping, and, frequently, abuse and ostracism.

Admittedly, some squirmy topics are purposely picked up and brought center stage to highlight important issues by different writers and such. Sometimes, when done with a deft hand, such treatment is quite effective. When done with a heavy hand or in over-the-top ways, they tend to work against their own goals. But I digress. I wanted to pursue a topic that was a little uncomfortable for me until I understood it better, that maybe made me squirm a little. It's easy to become complacent in one's own little perspective, looking out at the world through a single set of lenses and thinking you see things clearly. Until you've tried on a few sets of specs, though, you're just fooling yourself.

It wasn't just the differences in romantic characters here, either, or the similarities I didn't expect. Many of these are shorter works, stories told in a handful of chapters, if not just one, as opposed to the volumes of chapters I'm used to to portray a moving story. That was instructional in and of itself.

I'm grateful I pursued a little different perspective and hope to use what I learned in my novels.

What did I learn?

(a) That my view, that real love is about devoting yourself to the happiness of someone else besides yourself, is not gender specific. Jealousy, to an extent, is fine for romance, but to the point of ownership? - well, there you lost me. So that really didn't change, except that I saw some ways I never thought of before to be romantic. So, cool beans.

(b) I still hate rape. I don't care how prevalent it is in this or that literature. You will not hear any of my characters being forced, gasp, "No! Wait! Stop! Please!" and snuggling up to their rapist later. I know it happens plenty in today's heterosexual romances, too. Still hate it and you won't find it in my books (unless I"m killing the rapist later). I will remember, however, that not everything that looks like rape really is. Motivation does matter (though perhaps not as much as some people think it does).

(c) People can have sex in the craziest positions, places, and times. Seriously, wow. Doubt, admittedly, that that will be a key element in my writing, however.

(d) A story must be more than a showcase for episodes of sex or even for a romantic hookup. Real love is frequently physical, but rarely just physical. If it's all about the love story of two people, but we don't really know who they are or care for them, if it doesn't affect the world around them (or isn't affected by the world around them), chances are it's pretty dull. I knew this already, but it was amazing how two different stories with similar story lines could vary in appeal, enjoyment, and overall readability. Even if the art was inversely proportional in quality to the story.

(e) Characters, characters, characters. I knew this too, but there's a world of difference in the importance and impact of what happens to characters you're invested in, that you really like, and ones who leave you cold. Even if you don't always like what they do.

(f) No one said you get to choose who you love. Sometimes who you love is damn inconvenient, utterly hopeless, entirely inappropriate, or downright embarrassing . You might never act on that love, either for fear for yourself or in consideration of the object of your affection, but that does not make one's love less compelling or painful or powerful.

(g) No one said you get to choose who you love. Even, sometimes, if the one you love is entirely bad for you, it doesn't mean you can't love them, don't love them, won't love them. I've always been fairly harsh on women who let themselves be abused, at least if they had children. Seeing couples where children aren't a factor reminded me that, even if you leave to save yourself, that doesn't mean you necessarily stop loving someone, no matter how unhealthy that person is for you.

(h) A real connection between people is important for any kind of character interaction (not just romance, though definitely for romance). Stories are more interesting if there are other differences and challenges to overcome (personality, economical, social status, etc.). A story with people who respect each others' work or capabilities, who use those skills to do more than just romp in the bedroom, but interact effectively with the world at large, is far more rewarding than tossing too mismatched people in a room together and calling it love or even friendship. And you have to see those characteristics and strengths, that connection, not just be told the connection exists.

(i) People who are very quirky/off nominal pairings can make for extremely compelling stories. I read one author who's drawing style I don't care for in the slightest, even after reading more than a dozen works. So, why did I read a dozen works? I found them incredibly compelling. Some supernatural, some so freaking original I never saw it coming, some unbelievably sweet. Most were quite short but I found the universally ugly characters won me over time and time again often within a couple pages. I cared about them and always rooted for these often extremely weird couples. I've got more to read and what fodder for livening things up for my own work it is! Proof positive that every love story ain't the same.

(j) Very effective portraits of a characters personality can be drawn (with words in my case) very quickly, often with only a few tiny acts, little things that say something important about who a character really is. It's true when they're drawings, too, but often the gestures and expressions, the little acts, were far more telling than the conversation. You don't need pages of description. I knew that as a short story writer. It's easy to lose sight of that as a novelist, but that quick portrait can be just as effective in long prose (even if, for some characters, who want to study them and learn them over time). I needed the reminder.

(k) Life is messy. If you make it too tidy, it either feels contrived or dull. Neither is good in a story.

(l) Humor makes everything better. I have quite a list of favorites, and the quality you'll find most frequently if you troll through those favorites is funny. Extra points for those mangas that can laugh at themselves.

I enjoyed it, overall. I love to learn, you know. I wonder what I'll stumble into next.

Getting Physical

2011-11-06T22:19:00.000-06:00

So, two people of whatever age have become romantically interested in each other, specifically two men have acknowledged this interest to each other. Now, as I'd mentioned in previous posts, if these two guys are already gay and know it, they will probably move on to the next steps with minimal fanfare. They might even have travel sized bottles of lube or condoms in one or more pockets. But that's not particularly interesting to my way of thinking or that different from a similarly armed heterosexual couple comfortable with sex. And yes, I will be talking about it.

I'm more interested in what goes through the mind of someone(s) who never thought he was gay facing up to what that means. I mean, if physicality wasn't any part of the issue, hanging out all day and all evening, every evening, probably wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. That's the up side to same gender friendships (and some heterosexual friendships, actually). In fact, that's one thing that surprised me when I first read yaoi. I've read a LOT of shoujo manga and I can count on one hand the number that have moved beyond kissing and hand-holding, maybe some light groping, to sex. I've now read a LOT of yaoi (written, ironically enough by women for women, remember, just like shoujo) and I can count on one hand the number of manga that have NOT overtly including sex. Which argues physicality is a key element.

(No, boys and girls, I won't be putting up any actual sex shots, I swear, just pictures that illustrate my points on how complex the topic is, like this one that's quite pertinent from a practical little one shot called [inexplicably] Wild and Strawberry [link has sexually explicit pictures] by Suzuki Tsuta. But, again, I will be talking about it.)

But, whereas reference is plentiful on what men and women do together, including most sex education courses, and the jigsaw fits neatly, that kind of information is not as readily available and/or things may not be so intuitive for men, even men who have experience with women. There are several key differences known to even the most reticent and I would guess that your young man who'd never really considered male-to-male coupling before would be a bit daunted, quite probably a whole lot embarrassed, and potentially scared out of his mind.

It's not without it's up side, of course, aside from pleasure. One of the reasons why sex with girls is a "big deal," particularly among the younger sets just getting their hormones revving, is that pregnancy is a very real concern. Disease is, too, but, let's face it, most people don't think it can happen to them (which is, sadly, how they get spread), else the pill would not be such a popular method. A girl's got to be (or at least ought to be) careful who she, eh, spreads her legs for because, even today, the bulk of the onus and responsibility for the end results she bears. That particular boogeyman, getting someone pregnant, does not apply in homosexual cases. Disease, however, still does.

Now, there are many that assume gay sex is "just" anal sex, but, according to [warning: link has sexual explicit pictures] Wikipedia, it is far from ubiquitous (~2/3 of gay men) with various alternatives I will not describe here but that are mentioned in passing on the link provided. You are free to do (or not do) your own research.

From Yajuu de Hatsukoi [warning: link has sexual explicit pictures]by Yamato Nase

But it's a non-trivial thing. Places on your own body you probably never thought of anyone but your wife touching (and places you never expected/wanted anyone to touch) will be handled, even licked by someone else, another man. Men can (and have) been overpowered by other men and that's a real fear, too. As someone on the receiving end of sex, it's frightening to give up so much for trust. I don't regret it, but I can tell you, even with everything fitting together and hormones raging, my first experiences (yes plural) were very painful. Technique matters. Fear and anticipation matter, too. Ditto for trust.

That's even more true with something as invasive as anal sex. Technique and lubrication are considered key elements in the comfort of this technique even it's not your first time. And, and I've had no luck finding an answer in the yaoi, I've never figured out how one decides who is going into whom the first time. Is there a special formula? Does someone call dibbs? Is this a source of consternation and friction early on for many new couples? I'm not being flippant; I'm honestly curious. I would think the experience far more daunting for the never-did-it-before receiver than it would for his partner who is largely doing a variation on what is done with women. But if the first time's botched royally, I would expect it would be challenging for either partner to continue, at least together.

You know, that's a lot of pressure. More so than premature ejaculation or not getting your girl off, though perhaps on kilter with not making her first experience painful (though, from what I've heard from friends, most girls don't remember anyone being particularly considerate). The partners involved have to have an extraordinary level of trust and commitment (however physical that is) if they want the pairing to be successful over the longer hall. Talk about performance pressure!

Why talk about this? Because this is something I really haven't addressed before. Physicality is important for male-female romances, too, but it's different and distinct with different requirements, different hangups and different challenges. What's the same is almost as fascinating as what's different.

From a character interaction standpoint, the prospect, anticipation, and follow-through on something like this is outside anything I've written about or thought about. It seems earth-shattering to me, making me very grateful to be a girl, and gives me all kinds of ideas on how to bring intensity of feeling forward in my own writing. The stakes. The responsibilities. The impact.

Damn, I love to learn.

Whole Different Ballgame

2011-10-29T00:47:00.004-05:00

Man, time flies. Sorry, sorry, I shouldn't let so much time pass between blog posts. Last post, I was pointing out just how much more some poor slob has at stake acknowledging (to himself) and then communicating his passion for his fellow fellow to said, um, fellow.

I went over it in some length about how it's unlikely you'd make a confession to someone who wasn't important, how that importance, that drive to communicate it just made it that much more to lose and how drastically the recipient (if he's not already established gay) could potentially react to the disclosure of featuring in a buddy's romantic fantasies.

Let's face it, there's a lot more at stake from "You're cute. Wanna go out?" to "I've tried and tried but I can't stop thinking of you. I love you and can't keep this to myself any longer," even if we don't add the gender element. So, yeah, being the man to man up and admit his feelings is no easy task nor one, I'd think, a man would take lightly except in the right environment (like say a gay bar where, hopefully, his odds of finding a prickly non-gay recipient are less).

But what about the other guy on the receiving end of this confession. Let's assume, for one moment that he's not an acknowledged homosexual (though he might be quietly aware of that particular sexual preference) and assume he's not the kind to kill or beat the ever living crap out of someone just because he admitted to caring about him, because, in either case, minimal soul-searching is required. If he's an acknowledged homosexual, he can answer with a similar freedom a heterosexual would have if the confessor were a different gender. If he's answering with violence, again, little thinking is required.

But, between those extremes are a great many situations, many of them uncomfortable. The recipient (Call him Sho just 'cause) for "Jin's" confession could be someone who always considered himself a regular heterosexual guy - could readily be a regular heterosexual guy who's just discovered his friend or a acquaintance likes him and perhaps lusts after his body. Let's assume there's no inclination (at all) for Sho to reciprocate. That's a whole world of hurt you're laying down, but, more than that, you're probably doing a good bit of soul searching on why your friend was gay without you knowing and what it says about you that he found you appealing. I suspect some people could move past the confession and maintain a healthy relationship, but I'd also suspect a large percentage of such people in that position would never look at their friend the same way again. A sad ending to our story, but only a couple of degrees more traumatic than its heterosexual counterpart.

Similarly, if Sho happens to be aware of his own homosexual inclinations (either bisexual or homosexual will work), again he can respond with sensitivity but without much more impact than a heterosexual encounter. One would think that the confessor (Jin) might have an inkling of this and have less to lose as a result, but that might not be the case.

What really gets challenging, however, is when Sho has never considered himself anything but a heterosexual person and yet can't quite dismiss Jin's interest out of hand, for various reasons: the friendship is so valuable/essential that he's willing to pursue more rather than lose it, curiosity, similar feelings he'd not been able to bring himself to acknowledge, etc. All that soul searching Jin had to go through before he could confess, on what his passion said about him as a man, now Sho's got to go through a crash course if he's not going to refuse Jin out of hand (which is almost undoubtedly his gut reaction). He isn't going to have the leisure to consider and work through it indefinitely - Jin is waiting for an answer, with 'bated breath no less. He's going to have to think about what people would say if they found out (because two guys "dating" is easier to spot than one guy with a crush).

Oh, and one more thing. Now they're both going to have to think about the implications of pursuing romance with another guy, the physical side of it. When it was just the dream of one guy, that aspect may have figured prominently (depending, possibly, on his experience level) or been too far beyond his expectations to have figured in it. If both guys are interested in moving forward, however, it's potentially both a bigger deal and a lesser deal than it would be if one were a woman.

And I'll probably talk about that next time, whenever next time is.

Upping the Stakes

2011-10-11T20:44:00.004-05:00

If talking about homosexuality gives you the willies, be warned. I'll be talking about it. On the other hand, maybe you could learn something. I am.

This is one my posts exploring what I'm learning from exploring yaoi manga, which could be seen as boy-on-boy romantic smut (as opposed to "bara" which is generally less romantic and more about the physicality, or so I've read). So, what have I been learning as I delve into a different world, a different environment? Or at least, one type of portrayal of that kind of world? Well, I need to add a couple of disclaimers. What I've been reading, called "yaoi" is actually male-on-male romantic manga generally written by and for women and girls to read. So, one might expect there to be marginal realism. However, it still has given me pause to consider things that are the same and things that are potentially different with regards to a gay couple.

Today, I'm noting the difference in magnitude in confessing a heterosexual romantic interest and confessing a homosexual interest.

Now people around the world don't necessarily have a love confession like is often portrayed in many kinds of manga: "Hey, I really like you. Would you go out with me?" but it really struck me how much more is on the line for a gay guy in that situation. You like someone, even love someone who might be your best friend in the world or someone you barely know that you saw and instantly fell for or just someone you were drawn to.

First, you have to come to grips with it yourself. If you knew you were already inclined that way, preferring men to girls, the fact that you love another man is unlikely to cause you untold soul-searching. True, every overt move toward another man is an opportunity for your preferences to become known (and stigma still attaches to this sort of thing in most societies), but you have probably already come to terms with who you are.

But what if, as frequently happens in what I've been reading, you either haven't known (or acknowledged) your preferences or, as it could be, you don't necessarily have a preference so much as a connection to a certain person who, for whatever reason, calls to your own soul. Maybe you've always dated women without understanding why it never really worked for you, why you couldn't become bone-deep passionate about them? Maybe you don't have a natural preference for a particular gender, but just particular people. Maybe sex has always been impersonal before, gender notwithstanding. But, if you never thought of yourself as a homosexual, before you've confessed to anyone, you have to come to terms with how you feel, what, if anything, that says about you, what that does to your own view of yourself as a man.

Ideally, I'd hope, you realize it doesn't change that, but then it's easy for me to say that. It's not a question I'll likely have to deal with, given that I've pushed three people out of my body. But there's something to be said for how society has inflicted stereotypes and concepts on people. There's nothing in the world that keeps someone homosexual from being a talent or capable athlete or soldier or policeman to teacher or delinquent. It doesn't make you more tough or less so, doesn't determine your favorite color. It doesn't make you a threat to your "buds" who are just friends, or, in fact, to anyone else. In fact, it doesn't really mean a thing except that you love people that come with the same equipment (or at least one person who does).

(There's a big controversy, apparently, because yaoi often portrays this ambiguously without making clear that people are "born" one way or the other. I'm not going to tell anyone gay they were or weren't born that way, but I'm also not going to tell someone else who says they aren't that they were. Not sure there's one and only one answer for everyone. But I don't know; I'm not gay)

That's one of the biggest differences I've been thinking of when comparing the realization you love someone to heterosexual relationships. Even if a relationship is completely inappropriate or impossible for any number of reasons, loving someone of the opposite sex doesn't impart the same level of soul-searching an unsuspecting young man would face when he realizes that the person he loves most, that he wants to touch sexually or to have in his life, is another man.

Girls, you'll be pleased to know that men, if manga is any indication, are no better at communicating with each other than they are communicating with us, at least if romance is involved.

Now, let's say our protagonist (we'll call him "Jin" which is often used to denote "man" or person in Japanese compound words) has wrestled with his soul and come to terms with the realization that he loves another man, that, despite trying to pretend it's friendship or kinship or some other feeling, he is sexually and/or romantically attracted to another man. What does Jin do?

A girl in that situation, or a boy, might be thinking how they could get that feeling reciprocated, or about finding a way to ask the other person out, or be too shy to say anything. But note how much less they have to lose to make a move, whether subtle or overt. A boy can ask a girl out and, if she refuses, that doesn't make it the end of their relationship. They can still be friends or coworkers or whatever. In fact, it's so painless (relatively speaking) that a heterosexual doesn't have to reserve asking someone out until he or she is desperately in love. He or she can ask if someone's just cute or has a nice smell or strikes one the right way. In fact, the less one is already invested in it, the less of a risk it is.

But for Jin who loves another guy, particularly if the guy in question is not overtly gay, it's considerably stickier. If the "guy" is not someone he is deeply attached to, someone he truly loves, why would you risk it? And risk you do, even if your heart isn't on the line. With attitudes as they are, you could get the crap beaten out of you for speaking your heart. Even someone who might not be bothered to find a good friend gay might react violently to find himself the object of affection. Even if violence doesn't break out, ugly words readily could and you've now made clear your sexual orientation to someone who might very well feel antagonistic; i.e. you've take the chance on it all going public (which can ruin someone, even today).

But even if that doesn't happen, even if the object of affection is tolerant and understanding, if he's not of the same mind and inclinations, there's an excellent chance that a friendship or relationship Jin cherishes, perhaps the only contact he has with this person, could be lost or transformed into something entirely different. Every word studied for nuance, every gesture, every touch could be examined and treated with suspicion. Putting the genie back into the bottle ain't that easy.

But what if this guy really is the love of Jin's life? Those of you (like me) who might feel like you've found your soulmate may know what I'm talking about here. If someone is the one, THE one, keeping silent, keeping the distance, being friends may just not be an option. And that just means you're gambling with your very heart, gambling everything because what you want matters that much. The more you are compelled to speak, to act, the more you have to lose, the more it will hurt if your love and heart are rejected with extreme prejudice.

Food for thought. Next, giving some thought to receiving such a confession...

Diving Into the Uncomfortable

2011-10-06T16:25:00.002-05:00

There's a saying in writing - "Write what you know." My friend, Darrell B Nelson, says, "Write what you don't know." I'm not an advocate for either approach - both have their benefits and drawbacks - but I'm a strong believer in good characters, strong characters, characters that challenge the mindset of the average (American) reader as they are my most likely audience.

Historically, my characters have been, to an extent, modeled on myself or my husband, on people we know and interacted with, combined with varying amounts of imagination. I'll still do that, but I want to give my characters more depth and an expanded viewpoint from what I have. So, as a lover of knowledge and advocate for research, I have always exhaustively delved into cultures and histories that fascinated me. Since my interests are eclectic, that means I can name most kings of England and not a single one for Prussia, for example (in fact ,that whole Prussia/Holy Roman Empire thing still confuses me a bit). I've read Russian history and studied it for my own edification. I've read about the different Chinese dynasties and histories and the same with Japan. I find it fascinating, noting particularly the differences in how cultures deal with different but comparable issues.

That education in multi-culturism (which is not, by any means, complete) helps me when world building or culture building so I'm not restricted to Western notions of life or right and wrong, etc. I can tailor necessities to the circumstances. Some of what I learned made me more confident pointing out physical differences and addressing those between characters (i.e. characters of different color or, in some cases, species). I've frequently butted headfirst into the stereotypes of men and women as well, using, defying or ignoring them as required to tell a good story.

Well, I've stumbled onto a new area of research that I haven't really pursued before, through a very unexpected source. Smut.

Now, don't get me wrong. I've stumbled over smut before. I have seen a representative smattering of what I tend to think of as man smut (like pornographic films and the like), which has never appealed to me, and more than my fair share of woman smut, usually in the form of "romance" novels but often having no more soul than the average stag film (and frequently objectifying women as much or more than the male counterpart) . I don't object to sex in my novels (or films), but novels or films that are nothing but excuses to parade prurient scenes have never interested me.

Novels that tell good stories that have believable/likable/fascinating characters where sex also occurs, however, I've always enjoyed just fine. Possibly still counting as smut, but not JUST smut. Smut with substance, or is that an oxymoron?

Well, I've found a hitherto untapped selection of smut, different than I'm used to, and I have to admit my interest has been piqued. Just as shoujo manga rekindled my interest in romantic stories by having characters I loved and cherishing people who actually were capable of adult self-control (as opposed to those romances full of "adults"), I have discovered a resource for expanding my outlook on a group of people I'm woefully ignorant of: homosexuals.

Now, if you get the willies just hearing the term or are militantly anti-gay, you might as well stop reading here. And this will probably bleed over into several posts, so you're forewarned. On the other hand, if you want to expand what you understand on this subject, as I did, perhaps you should read forward, even if it makes you uncomfortable.

Now, just because I'm not confident to write a gay persona doesn't mean I don't know any gay people. I do. Quite probably more than I think I do. Nor have I ever had the slightest heartburn with people finding happiness with whoever made them happiest, gender notwithstanding. I have never felt otherwise and don't now.

But I also knew that, as a heterosexual girl, I had very little insight into the world of same-gender romance, lifestyles and interactions. Even where I could speculate regarding girls, I was hopelessly clueless when it came to gay men except what I've seen peripherally in films and such. For that reason, I have really not assayed gay characters. I don't object to them, but I'd want to portray them realistically. I know they're people like anyone else, but they have different issues than many of the rest of us.

Recent, an otaku acquaintance of mine suggested a number of mangas, including "Betrayal Knows My Name" which I'm enjoying. Apparently, there's a yaoi element attached to it (yaoi being the manga term for boy-boy romantic manga, which is popular with girls too, apparently), so bunches of yaoi jumped into my amazon.com recommendations. So, although I'd never been interested in it, I checked some out.

And became fascinated.

Not with the acts depicted (and most are pretty graphic about it) nor about wishing I could indulge. I'm not properly equipped and the flexibility required (apparently) is rather daunting. I became fascinated with the stories, the scenarios, the characters in this or that yaoi.

Now, don't get me wrong, much of it is smut smut, in the truest sense of the word: "stories" and characters brought together with little fanfare as an excuse to show sex. That pales quickly. And, yaoi, even more than man porn but perhaps less than woman porn, lends itself to force and violence more than average. Stories at least skirting the edge of pederasty are also common (at least in the one's I've read so far), so not all good. I don't like rape or child abuse, I don't care which genders are involved. (Note, however, that "child" is a term I'm using loosely since the age of consent in Japan is 13 and everyone is well over that.).

But, I have also found profound food for thought, not only into the challenges and interactions for gays, particularly in a world that stigmatizes them based on their sexual preferences, but also in what they're looking for, how they interact, and both the parallels and disconnects with romantic relationships between men and women. Also, what makes them different from "regular" men and what doesn't.

So, though what I'm learning is coming from manga, where I'll best be able to use what I learn is writing, so I'll be writing about it here.

Starting next time.

How I'll Know I'll Have Made It

2011-09-18T23:07:00.002-05:00

I'm not talking about being published, though, of course, that would likely have to happen first. And I'm not talking about book sales, though, naturally, that would be nice, too.

But I don't just want to be a successful writer in the monetary sense. I want to write good books, books that touch people with characters that people care about. And I think I know now how to to know when that happens.

I spend odd moments checking on the Skip Beat! forum using my new android phone. It's a nice distraction and I enjoy speculating about what will be happening next in this long-running manga and gushing over it with other enthusiasts. 'Cause, hey, I'm an otaku. But I've discovered something.

You know when characters have really touched people when readers get really really angry defending one over the other or determining who's better at this or that. Star Trek, you find some true fans, start laying into one captain or another and they'll come out swinging.

I've been listening to the talk on the forum, one of the threads all about which of our romantic leads, who both struggled in childhood, had it harder or more painful. The son of the celebrity quietly struggling to live up to his father's regard and dealing with brutal bullying vs. the girl ignored and marginalized by a mother who left her in the care of others most of her life.

We've only seen flashbacks on the two individuals and have some information on the impact each of their pasts have had on them. Both are strong individuals with scars and baggage they are largely working through together. Why in the world would it matter which had it technical harder than the other.

But people get passionate and figuratively shake fists and forgo courtesy, telling anyone who doesn't see it "their" way they're stupid or they aren't reading things, yadda yadda yadda.

I'm not saying I want people to become assholes because they care about the characters in my books, but it says something, something important, that a reader can be passionate about a character, passionate about who they end with , what happens to them, how other fans see the characters they love.

When readers get spun up defending your characters, as a writer it says that you wrote characters that touched people, that pulled out emotion, that mattered to people enough they would defend the fictional histories or personalities traits to other readers.

That's what I want my readers to do. When I have readers fighting among themselves on whether Dylan Chroz or Xander would win the bout on Jeopardy! (which is silly because Dylan would win unless Dante da Silva was playing, what with his 700+ years of experience to draw on). I want people to yell at the book, "Watch out!" or "You bastard!" or "You just made a real mistake, pal."

When people defend the people I've created against other fans, that's when I'll know:

I've done it. I've touched them and made up people that strangers have adopted, loved and identified with.

I'll have done what I set out to do.

Swamped

2011-09-14T00:02:00.004-05:00

You ever been hit with scenes so quickly you can't get 'em on paper quick enough? And, of course, they would bombard me when I'm working overtime like mad for three weeks.

Not necessarily in the order I'm writing it, of course. I'm planning some rather complex interactions between characters and I've been having fun thinking of scenes between all my interesting characters. In fact, before I know it, they've gotten away from me and I know I'm dabbling in books I'm not even writing yet.

Not that I'm having trouble when I sit down and move forward in the actual book, during those brief snatches of time when I can actually write. It seems to flow pretty effortlessly, too. So, I can't complain...

Except, with so many scenes and so little time, blogging is likely to fall by the wayside until I get a lull in something, either my work schedule or the flood of scenes I enjoy.

Paranormal vs. Fantasy/Science Fiction

2011-09-04T20:10:00.002-05:00

I was reading a series of books a friend recommended to me, quite a successful series I believe, the Anita Blake series by Laurell K. Hamilton that should have been right up my alley. Some attempts at humor, generally kickass heroine who is center stage, weird happenings everywhere.

Except I didn't. Nothing wrong with those that like it. We can't all like the same things. There were a few reasons for this for me, and I can go into them, but I'm not sure they're all important. What I noted after reading the first book was that I only liked one character, Jean-Claude (because apparently becoming a vampire negates the necessity of a last name), a vampire Anita threatened to kill a few times and who was in, what, fifty pages of the book? I liked him well enough to try a second book, but kept running into the same issue (and a few new ones). I just didn't like the main character. There were a few reasons for this, too, like hypocrisy and doing idiotic things, being blase about killing her "friends" one minute and willing to die for them the next, etc. But I could have forgiven all of that if I had liked the essential her. And I figured out why: to her, what you are is more important than who.

One reason I generally haven't been part of the recent vampire fetish (Twilight doesn't count - they're nothing like vampires and besides, that's not why I liked it) is because I never understood the big deal with vampires. They've never seemed inherently interesting. Having a story centered around vampires, to my way of thinking, isn't any different in concept from having a story centered around Elves in Middle Earth or lizardians on Seti Omega Nine. They're all stories about people, whether gifted or scaly or sparkly or what-have-you. The rules and priorities change, depending on specific needs, but the story about people inherently is the same. That's how it is to me, because I was raised on Science Fiction and Fantasy, on the original Star Trek, on Heinlein. In Fantasy/Science Fiction, who you are always outranked what you were. It was one way you had to tell the good guys from the bad guys. Bad guys were all concerned with the color of your skin, whether you had hair or feathers, which end you broke on your boiled egg. Good guys either knew better or learned better over the course of the story.

What seems to be going on in paranormal is an entirely different thing, where being some sort of something different inherently makes one evil. True, you might fight your evil side and, if you can fight it indefinitely, you could be accepted as redeemed by normal people, but you don't get the benefit of the doubt. You're evil until proven otherwise. And there are no limits to the level or extent of evil you are as something "other," it comes with the extra powers like a promotional extra. So, if you're a protagonist who happens to be something other, you have to indefinitely fight the inherent evil in you. If you're not an "other," you can kill all the others you like to your hearts content, 'cause, hey, they're evil.

To me that's a throwback to the "The only good Injun is a dead Injun," and "Only good Jew is a dead Jew," kind of thinking I've always abhorred. And, truthfully, thought we were finally outgrowing. Pity.

I have a problem with that kind of thinking. I don't think anything is inherently evil (or, for that matter, inherently good). I think how someone is treated should a direct result of what they do and who they are, not what they happen to be (unless that's something like a serial rapist). In my books, that notion is a recurring theme, the basis for how my characters interact and grow. I had started to worry that the notion was outdated, that I'd be preaching to the choir.

Apparently not.

Guess I don't write paranormal after all.

The Vagaries of Writing

2011-08-17T00:26:00.001-05:00

I do not write like many other writers. Many people are advocates for the write-every-day-no-matter-what method and more power to them. I can't do that. It's not laziness on my part, though, of course, I am lazy. I literally cannot write like that because my brain works differently than normal people. While I go through my day to day reading and workin' and blogging and reading blogs, and otakuing, and watching kids and stuff, my subconscious takes everything I'm exposed to and plays with it, tweaks it, fillets it, combining it with work I started but that petered out or was going in the wrong direction, and ideas I've had that I haven't quite figured out what to do with.

Then, most likely when I'm desperately busy with something, it will push out the new story and say, "Write this, write this now" and I'll be filling every free minute (and not so free minute) with writing and crafting and putting down dialog and refining a few details my subconscious left so my conscious mind wouldn't feel useless. The good news is that it will come out (based on the last four works) pretty clean, with perhaps a little rearranging and a bit of polishing but really not requiring a serious overhaul. And, as I write it, I'll love it like I'm my own fan, tickled at my own jokes and falling in love with this or that character. It's sadly narcissistic but there you have it.

It's, in fact, very gratifying to write that way...except, in between these sessions where I'm all but hemorrhaging fiction, I have nothing to write and feel a bit useless. This is compounded by the realization that my subconscious is clearly working on something but, and this is the kicker, I have no idea what it might be. It could be something I started that needs to be finished. It could be the next sequel in my Bete novel series. It could be my husband's novel he's been wanting me to finish for some bloody time now (though that's partially his fault - we've written nearly 200,000 words on it, but we have to keep starting over as his idea grows up). It could be a couple of the ideas I've been kicking around that I think have promise.

Or it could be something completely different, something I hadn't even thought of. So that all the work I have languishing will continue to languish as I gush over something completely unexpected (which happened last time). Pity really. I like much of the stuff that's languishing, but I'm afraid to tackle it without my subconscious (which does the GREAT writing) in case it gets all uppity and refuses to help at all. Which it is prone to do. Sigh.

It could just be that my subconscious wants me to start actively marketing the work it's already done. Which is actually a good idea.

Sigh again.

Sensual Romance Part 2

2011-08-02T19:09:00.002-05:00

Here, I'm just going to talk about guidelines I use when incorporating sensuality+romance in my books. These are things I bear in mind when I write it as well as features/aspects I like when I read a book. Use them only if it works for your own work: there are no hard and fast rules here.

Use all the senses. I've said this repeatedly but it's the one thing I see happen over and over again. Taste, smell, touch, sound and sight can all be used, but also physical reactions, how the individual(s) involved (depending on POV) are actually feeling, how they're reacting, sounds and movements they make. That's another thing...

Don't make it too static. Have the characters gasp and tremble and stroke and move, sweat and slide. Sensuality is to titillate the senses and get a reaction. If your character isn't reacting, your reader likely isn't either.

Get emotionally involved. Physical reactions, including lust, are all well and good but it's not romance unless you have something else as well. That doesn't mean that the emotions have to be in every scene (or even every sensual scene), but if you never tie the sensuality with the romance, the romance will likely fall flat and or the sensuality can seem impersonal. Or both.

Sex does not equal romance. Lust is often associated with romance for good reason and losing control has it's own appeal; however, romance (by my definition) requires a pointed interest in the other person's happiness, which means restraint of that lust or curbing one's own passion can be far more romantic than losing control entirely, particularly if one's partner is not in the same place yet. Or in love at all for that matter. Sexual/romantic tension, in fact, can be quite effective in involving the reader (one could make an argument that sexual/romantic tension is the primary draw for the Twilight series, but I digress). My point is you don't have to jump into sex over and over again in order to get the most from your sensuality+romance.

Leaven your use of sensuality+romance. Just like sensuality (non-romantic) lost it's punch if you use it all the time, same goes for the romantic kind. If your characters are spending every other page mooning, touching, breathing each other's air, etc, those scenes where you really want to draw the reader in or really move the relationship forward can be leeched of their impact. A healthy relationship is more than physical interaction. A successful romance is ideally between individuals that are both contributing to the relationship, people who can talk and interact and work together effectively. Hopefully, there's more going on in the book than just billing and cooing.

You don't have to describe everything. I know, I know, I talked about movement and senses, etc. But there are things that can be implied and, in general, every little movement and/or sexual act does not have to be described in detail. What you want is the reader involved. Once you've pulled them in, chances are they can fill in the blanks themselves. Let them. Part of the charm of books is that your imagination fills in between the lines, so sometimes less is best. Use your best judgement.

Mix it up. Don't make all the scenes sound the same. Using a formula for a romantically sensual scenes is a sure way to dilute them. In real life, people may be creatures of habit, but inflicting that kind of reality on a reader is a good way to send a reader looking elsewhere for entertainment.

Hmm. You know, I think I might just be done with this topic.

Sensual Romance Part 1

2011-07-27T15:42:00.002-05:00

Though sensuality can be used effectively for all kinds of things (suspense, action, grief, relief, etc), there's a reason why it's often thought of in conjunction with love and sex (not necessarily in that order). Romances, sneered at by much of the literary world, are routinely bestsellers (at least the better ones). That's not a fluke.

Writing sensuality well can bring a book or character to life. Combine it with an element of romance effectively portrayed, the reader can fall in love. And that's not limited to romance novels. I probably have 300-400 books on my "favorite, read over and over" shelves in my bedroom. I can probably count on my fingers (if not one hand) how many are completely devoid of romantic elements (note, in some cases, there are books in a series where several aren't romantic while the overall series has a strong element of romance). These are the books I pull down and read over and over, books I fell in love with years ago and still read with fresh eyes at almost every opportunity. There are historical novels (Clavell, Michener, Stewart), classics (Dumas, Brontë, Austin, Hugo), mystery (Sayers, Robb), action/thriller (Ludlum, King), tons of science fiction and fantasy and, yes, romance (Roberts, Heyer). It should be noted that, for those authors I'm passionate about, there are similar rabid fans out there as well. (That's not even counting the manga; ALL of my manga have strong streaks of romance).

Romance, in fact, makes a fine pairing with books that have other strong emotional elements, like thrillers or horror, action-heavy novels, science fiction/fantasy (given that interracial/intercultural elements are often best portrayed through romance) or dramatic fiction (depending on the topic). Thrillers, in particular, do well with romance because there is something particularly compelling about people in fear for someone else as opposed to merely concerned about their own safety. Ditto for people putting themselves in harm's way for love of someone else. Swashbuckling rescuing types never entirely go out of style, though venue and gender can vary a great deal more than it used to. People like to identify with people they can admire and it's a great deal easier to admire someone striving to save someone else, than someone cowering in fear for him or herself (even if that fear is completely justified). Romance readily provides a motive acceptable to most. Fighting might be cool; fighting for somethingor someone is compelling.

My point is that, just because you're not writing romances, doesn't mean you can't take advantage of the sensuality+romance power. I don't think it's a coincidence that James Cameron (director of the far and away most financially successful movies world-wide) almost always injects a key romantic element, even in such hard-core stories like Terminator. I'm not saying that's the only reason he's successful (not hardly), but I think he thinks he believes in romance on his resume (if not his marriage record).

Which doesn't mean a writer has to have it. I do, but clearly I like romance (even if I'm not a fan of most romance novels). What I'm saying is that romance can be a compelling part of any kind of novel. But, as was the case for sensuality and romance as stand alone elements, skill is required to use it effectively. Clumsy "sensual romance" is about as appealing as homemade pudding you find in your fridge six months later. Which is why I don't read most romance novels. Ironic, no?

True, not everyone is as picky as I am, but on this blog, it's all about my efforts to write the best I can write and my personal guidelines (that other writers might or might not like). Half-assed or ineffective sensual romance doesn't interest me in the slightest. That means, when I talk romance, I'm talking about my own view on what romance is (described here) so you might have to adapt it to your own view on romance if you want to use my advice.

More next time...

Sensuality and Romance: Part Four

2011-07-21T22:18:00.003-05:00

So. let's say you get the concept (I'm sure you do) that sensuality is all about pulling on the senses and tugging reactions from the characters. While it's not just about sex, it is about passion, being involved emotionally and physically in what is going on.

My "sensual" scene last time, as you probably noted, was not about sex or romance in any way, and you can inject a great deal of sensuality in any kind of literature without having to have a love interest or even a sexual partner. Scenes, for example, like where Sully is exploring the surface of Pandora, facing off against the bulky herbivore and then the clearly carnivorous panther analog lend themselves well to sense description and emotional reactions. Those are scenes that lend themselves well to sensuality, sight, sound, smell, taste, touch. Hearts race, fear engulfs or minds wonder.

A scene like that is far more effective when given the immediacy that sensuality can provide. In fact any scene where the character in question is struggling with the extremes of emotion can generally be served well with a dose of sensuality: the pain of being left broken after a beating, and the hatred or determination that's required to get back up and face your attacker, the sense of wonder as a small child greets the tiny creature his parents tell him is his new sister, the heartbreak when our hero breaks in only to find he's too late as he picks up the shattered body of his wife. Sensuality breathes life into scenes like this and can brand them indelibly on a reader's mind, quickening heartbeats, inducing tears. Really, isn't that a little bit why we all do this?

Of course, you can certainly use it for simple no-strings physical pleasure, too. Yes, sex. Nothing wrong with doing so, and any number of authors have characters that wend their way through their worlds enjoying the sins of the flesh without getting bogged down in anything so ridiculous as romance. But, be careful. Sensuality is partly about reaction, and sex where you don't feel much beyond the physical is going to be less powerful, in many ways, than sex where your emotions are more fully engaged (which is true in life, too, if my history is any example, but I digress). And you can rapidly lose sympathy with a character unless everyone involved leaves pretty much heart-whole. Start breaking the hearts of innocent maidens with your conquests and, pretty soon, you look like a schmuck (unless, of course, that's the kind of anti-hero you're going for). In any case, when using sensuality in this way, don't forget that you need multiple senses brought in and some form of reaction from your character in order to get the most impact.

A few other thoughts on sensuality in general (romance notwithstanding). While sensuality does great things for pivotal or powerful scenes and a little sensory description is good almost everywhere, try not to go too overboard with your sensuality for every scene. Two reasons for this recommendation:

(1) If every scene has our hero/heroine brought to the extremes of emotion, conflicted or anguished by emotion, the scenes start to all sound the same. I should not be as worked up over running out of toothpaste as I am that my daughter has run off with her boyfriend (whether he has piercings in his tongue or not). By making all the scenes emotionally charged, I take some of the power from the scenes where I need to make an impression, want to really feel a change is in works. Use the power of emotion and senses on those scenes that mean the most to the rest of the story, so that they are not diluted.

(2) Sensuality, done well, stops or slows action. If I'm spending a lot of time talking about what I'm seeing/hearing/tasting/smelling/feeling and my reaction to it, I'm not really doing much. Which doesn't mean you can't tie it with action, but you want to limit it to between action steps and not get carried away with three pages of descriptive ecstasy and two paragraphs of actual movement.

A light touch (lighter than I used yesterday) and a little judgement can do wonders for making the most of the senses, without slowing the story down or diffusing its power.

And, yes, I will eventually be putting sensuality and romance together.

Sensuality and Romance: Part Three

2011-07-17T11:13:00.007-05:00

I changed the title for those of you who were confused by the French. Also, warning, I'm going to talk about sex. Perhaps graphically. (No, RM, I don't know what I'm going to write here any more than I preplan what I'm writing when I do fiction).

I said one could do love, even deeply moving passionate romantic-type love, without expressing the sensuality inherent to that type of thing...but it was challenging to do so effectively.

Expressing sensuality without the romantic aspects is easy-peasy; however, in a way the same goes. Anyone can write about passion. Not everyone does it well. Not by a long shot.

One key reason for that, and the reason I chose sensuality in the title rather than passion, is that the descriptions of passion are frequently short on sensual description, which is fatal. Sensuality is all about titillating the senses, not just sight, but sound, touch, smell and taste as well. More than that, it's the reaction to those senses, what one feels. It's easy to lose sight of that, but sensuality is more than just sex, though it's frequently what comes to mind. It's the steeping of senses and the resulting emotions and actions.

For instance, for that picture that started all this, the story I wrote wasn't particularly sensual. If I'd wanted to focus on the sensuality of the picture, I could have limited myself to describing what was going on in the picture in terms of senses and emotions with no back story.

Pain pulsed through Lawrence as his finger ached to pull the trigger, kill the monster once and for all. Kilee was a demon, his sworn enemy. Untrustworthy, evil, bringing only devastation in his wake. Proof of that was the blood Lawrence shed in answer to Kilee's sharpened nails, warm sticky blood that stained his demon-hunter uniform. The radiating pain for those scores both tore at away at Lawrence's decency, demanding that he kill in response, and stayed his hand. As it was, Lawrence had already lost too much blood, could feel it pooling and cooling on his chest, could feel his heartbeat growing sluggish, starved of blood. His head swam and his hand shook, as his life flooded his front in a crimson wave, mocking him with its coppery smell. Death was inevitable. Unless.

He had enough strength left, physically, he could kill the demon who had deliberately killed him. Lawrence had Kilee where he wanted, in his grasp, his gun aimed at Kilee's head to kill him once and for all. But Kilee could say the same. Even with a gun to his head, Kilee knew Lawrence could hardly kill him when Kilee had the means for saving him. Kilee had cut his own throat and let his blood, the sweet verdant blood of the demons, trickle free to tempt Lawrence, an elixir that would heal Lawrence for this and all future ills. The smell of Kilee's blood overpowered the salty scent of his own blood with its seductive fragrance, the blood a drug so that Lawrence could not pull the trigger and kill this demons once and for all.

Kilee knew, of course, and there was no fear for himself when he spoke, "You need only one sip."

"Never," Lawrence gasped, his slowing heart beat echoing in his ears. His own voice sounded weak and distant.

Kilee laughed and touched his finger to his own blood. "Liar," he said. He touched the bloody finger to Lawrence's lips. Lawrence shuddered, not in disgust so much as ecstasy as he tasted the ambrosia of demon blood. The next instant, his mouth was pressed desperately against Kilee's throat, drinking deeply of that most hated blood, tasting its savory sweetness fill his mouth, hearing himself gulp it greedily, feeling it's healing warmth relieve his heart's burden and bring warmth to his cooling extremities. His fogging mind took on a sharp clarity it had never before known.

Pulling the trigger now would accomplish nothing. Kilee had already won, making Lawrence a demon with the sacrifice of Kilee's own blood. Kilee had proven his point as Lawrence had saved his own life at the expense of his soul.

No bullet would ever change that.

(Yes, I know there's story in that, too. Can't help it, as I explained at the time). Even without understanding the ins and outs of the characters or the real aspect of demons, this is a very powerful scene. Sensual description changes a pivotal occurrence into an an event that stirs emotions and drag the reader into picture. Describing it plainly wouldn't change the actual significance to the story, but it would not be as compelling or powerful without feeling Lawrence's pain and conflict. It makes the characters stronger, more sympathetic, more powerful. It helps weave that magic that lets a reader lose themselves in another world.

Compare that to something like this:

He needed the money she held in her hand. Somewhere, his wife coughed away, caught by the horrific disease that killed within days. The cure, quick and effective, was available only to those with money, money like this woman was offering so casually.

"What do you want from me?"

She licked her lips. "You know what I want." Yeah, he did. A woman looks like this, she wants a man in her. If he hadn't known, her fingers at her buttons, removing her shirt would have told him.

It's not like she wasn't beautiful. Her eyes might be hard, but her body was as curvy and appealing as only money could buy. When she unfastened her belt and let her pants slip down to the ground, he could see her ass was just as round and perfect, the kind of body that made a man's mouth water. Of course he wanted her. Who wouldn't?

He cleared his throat, but didn't move his eyes from her body. "I'm married."

"So am I. I'm not asking for a wedding ring, loverboy. I just want a little of your body temporarily."

His body was responding, his fingers already pulling at his clothes. "I'm not a gigolo."

"Sure you're not," she purred as she slid her body next to him, and kissed his neck. "Take me."

He said nothing more, just lifted her perfect body and buried himself in it, grunting as the passion over took him, blinding himself to anything and everything but this act. This woman. This feeling. This need.

When it was over, he felt drained, but not satisfied. "Thanks, loverboy," she offered, leaving the money on the counter where her ass had been seconds before. She was dressed and back to looking slick and perfect within minutes. "Feel free to leave the money if you don't really think you're a gigolo. We both know you wanted me, too."

His fingers scooped up the money as if she would change her mind. She just laughed as she left. He could save his wife now, he told himself. That was the important thing. But she'd never forgive him if she knew where he'd gotten the money, how he'd gotten it. She'd never believe he hadn't wanted to do it for his own sake.

And she'd be right.

Can you see the difference in that? How little power this pivotal event has comparatively? How much harder it is to sympathize with the man, even though, on the surface, his motivation is more noble. The act has far less power, not as much because it meant nothing, but because his involvement is ambiguous. We don't really see or feel the conflict. We're told he wanted her, but we don't feel it or get dragged in. It was actually really really hard to write that without putting in more sensuality and conflict. Writing that way is habit-forming, yet I've seen many key passages in published books as cold and flavorless as this...or worse.

I'll continue with sensuality without romance next time since this post is long enough. See you later.

Sensuality and L'Amour: Part Two

2011-07-12T21:45:00.005-05:00

Shakespeare mentioned that she preferred sensuality to romance. Well, I'm not a big one for sensuality without romance, but I have to agree that romance without any sensuality generally doesn't do it for me either.

Love without any physicality, any contact, any sense of touch or scent or taste is, well, flavorless and bland unless the writer is very very good. Can it be done? Yes. Austen and Heyer, both writers I admire, even love, wrote about or during periods of time where discussing scent was probably a mistake and when touch was mostly taboo. Somehow, they managed to convey humor and affection, love, even passion, with dialog and with a few well-chosen descriptions (sight and sound).

But, it's a lot more work.

He sat down for a few moments, and then getting up, walked about the room. Elizabeth was surprised, but said not a word. After a silence of several minutes, he came towards her in an agitated manner, and thus began:

"In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you."

****
"If you will thank me," he replied, "let it be for yourself alone. That the wish of giving happiness to you might add force to the other inducements which led me on, I shall not attempt to deny. But your family owe me nothing. Much as I respect them, I believe I thought only of you."

Elizabeth was too much embarrassed to say a word. After a short pause, her companion added, "You are too generous to trifle with me. If your feelings are still what they were last April, tell me so at once. My affections and wishes are unchanged, but one word from you will silence me on this subject for ever."

That's Pride and Prejudice and, I have to admit, especially taken out of context, it's hard to recreate the romance. Having said that, I know I'm not the only woman out there who still gets a thrill from the book, old-fashioned and chaste though it might be. If my imagination must provide the scenes left modestly out of the text, I am given characters and a sense of the emotional pull that drives them. For someone with an imagination like mine, that's enough.

But saying "XXX loves YYY" isn't enough, not even if you pull out your thesaurus and find a dozen synonyms for "love." Romance and non-romantic love has to be sold to the reader, demonstrated through word and deed. Can I tell you how to do it?

I can tell you how I do it, but not everyone sees love like I do. There are certain minimum parameters involved in love, in my mind, that include modicums of self-sacrifice, understanding, trust, protectiveness and friendliness. For romance, I usually add a measure of yearning, whether or not that desire is fulfilled.

That means that getting "it" is not more important than the happiness of the one you love. If "it" is, that's not my definition of romance. Oftimes, self-restraint is romantic. Love can mean protecting the one you love (and that's not gender specific to me). Love can mean being happy in each others company and dealing with your loved one as honestly as possible.

Nor is love limited to kisses and proposals. Love can mean doing things you'd never do for your own sake (up to and including protecting yourself). Love can mean believing something even when all the evidence argues against it. Love might be reflected in something as simple and meaningful as forgiveness or patience or gentleness.

That also means that love can be portrayed any number of ways quite effectively without contact like the hopeless empathy of the fictional Cyrano de Bergerac or the supreme sacrifice of Sydney Carton from A Tale of Two Cities.

But that's how I see romance. If you want to inject romantic elements into your book, you have to decide what you see love as and make sure those elements are reflected in the work itself. Romance in a novel is one of those things that must be shown, not told, or it comes across as flat and colorless. Unless, of course, that's what you see love as. :)

Next time, sensuality without romance.

Sensuality and L'Amour: Part One

2011-07-08T23:09:00.003-05:00

So, that was some picture last time, right? My daughter (16) who reads the same manga, brought it in to me saying, "You know, I'm not into guy on guy, but this is like the sexiest picture ever." I agreed, which is quite ironic given that the two men in the picture are not only not romantically involved but hate each other profoundly, largely because they both love the same woman. And both are in this picture, in this posture, as a direct result of that love. Zero (the one with the gun) so he wouldn't be driven mad and Kaname (getting slurped) because the woman he love cherishes Zero and he wants Zero beholden to himself so he can protect the girl when Kaname can't do it himself.

Now, why am I talking about this? Because it occurred to me that I hadn't talked much about sensuality and romantic love with regards to writing, and I think it's important. Not just because I'm a hopeless romantic (though, I am), but because this kind of relationship is a common one, not just in romance novels but every other genre as well. Even if the romance isn't central to the story or the primary protagonist(s), it's quite likely to factor as part of the motivation behind one or more other characters. When I talked about relationships earlier as part of the recipe for making a good story, this was one of the key kinds of relationships I was talking about.

I bring up the picture from last time to start the discussion by making you aware of the difference I see between sensuality and romance. The picture I pointed out was very sensual, obviously touching on more than one sense. Yes, yes, I know a picture is visual, but there was a sense of touch (wet blood), taste and smell (same wet blood, possibly gunpowder), movement and emotion. It would not take much to imagine the sounds. The picture was provocative (I presume deliberately so) and sexy.

What it wasn't (without knowing the back story) was romantic.

I bring this up because, far too often in my opinion, many novels don't make the distinction and trot out relationships that are filled to bursting with lust and sensual description but no depth beyond that. Sadly, a frightening larger percentage of these novels are labeled "romances" but I digress.

Now, I'm not against sensuality by any means. I love it. Nor do I think a book can't have sensuality without romance. But, as a writer, I think you should know the difference and understand what your characters have and why. Then write accordingly. Why? Because clumsy sensual scenes are far less objectionable if you have a real romance on your hands. People who are in love are frequently stupid or nonsensical. But, if your book is filled with sensuality, but no real love, you need to make sure you're doing your sensuality well. Cause crappy sensuality with no love is basically bad porn.

I mean, if you're going to write pornography, make it good at least. Sheesh.

Telling a Picture's Story

2011-07-01T19:35:00.009-05:00

Some time back, Relax Max did an exercise on his blog where he took a picture and wrote a scene to describe it, as if you were putting that scene in a book. Naturally, I had to try my hand at that, too. At the time, I assured him, I'd return the favor when I'd found just the right picture.

Well, boys and girls, here's a winner from Vampire Knight by Matsuri Hino. And, hey, it doesn't even have dialog to get in the way. You don't have to assume vampires, of course, but then that will mean pushing the ol' imagination just a bit further. Me too, especially since I know the real characters. It's interesting enough I might talk about that on the next post since my daughter and I had a conversation about it. But first, the exercise (click for a bigger version of the picture)!

When Kadon opened his door to the pounding that sounded even over the wind, he was unsurprised to see someone so close to death. After all, with his home just outside the village walls, his was frequently the first place--the only place--a survivor could go. A glance told him this one had only moments yet to live. Blood stained his shirt, his hands, from a vicious slashes to the throat. Kadon shook his head and tried to close the door.

The man surprised him by wedging his body into the door before Kadon could close it. His body might be fading, but his spirit was strong. Oh well, those were the ones most likely to be attacked by the nightbeasts. It was miraculous he had made it this far. "Please," the man begged.

Kadon was not a sympathetic soul but felt something approaching pity. "There is nothing to be done. Your wounds are too grievous."

"We were attacked! The Queen--," That explained the uniform and the foolhardiness of anyone out in these woods at night. The Queen, famed for her sorcery, probably thought her magic could protect her against the nightbeasts. "You have to save her!" The smell of blood was overwhelming and sweet, familiar...appealing.

"She's hardly my problem," Kadon said, but left the door open so the man could stumble in. "I doubt there is naught left to save if any were foolish enough to try to do so." Kadon felt his voice grow cold. "She and her armies have all but eliminated the nightbeasts in every corner of the country save here. She was an idiot to think she could pass through their last remaining stronghold unscathed."

The man had fallen to his knees and Kadon unconsciously crouched in front of him to catch his rasping whisper. "No...choice. Capital...ransacked...by...Daynor. No...where...to...run."

Daynor! Kadon would have stood at that, but the man grabbed him by the shirt, his fancy pistol still in his bloodstained hands. "That's impossible," Kadon said. Kadon was no friend to the Queen, but anyone was better than the Black Viper of Westrim. Death Merchant. Soulstealer. The Queen had been brutal in suppressing those magical factions she deemed a threat, but at least those were clean deaths, not the unholy experiments Daynor favored, the tortures and torments he reveled in.

"No...time..." the man gasped, pulling on Kadon with his last bit of strength. "Must...save...Queen..."

"I told you. It's too late for her unless she's in your pocket. It's even too late for you. If she was the sorceress she claimed to be, she should have found some way to escape."

"She...did..." the man breathed and, to Kadon's shock, latched his mouth to his neck, over the artery. At first, Kadon thought he meant to attack until he felt the cold shock of another soul entering his body, his mind, trying to subvert him as the man's body fell, lifeless, to the floor.

You, he accused. You will not take me over as easily as this man.

The unmistakable essence of the Queen laughed, though it was not a joyful sensation. Good. A weak man would not serve my purpose nor leave me any hope to regain my country.

You will not possess me.

Perhaps. I've a strong will, too. But you will not easily be quit of me either.

Kadon felt the truth of those words. But then, he knew something the Queen did not. You should have found a different host, Majesty. I am not an ordinary man.

With no effort, he transformed, shredding his bloody clothes with his massive new form: King Panther. Without a word, he began to feed on the warm flesh and last vestiges of spirit remaining in the Queen's henchman.

If he expected her horror, he waited in vain. She was so silent as he began his feast he wondered if she had, indeed, fled until she spoke at last with smug satisfaction.

Perfect!

Wasted Potential: Walk the Walk

2011-06-23T17:35:00.002-05:00

You may have noticed, as we've added elements to our gourmet story, that it gets more complicated to get all the aspects to work together. Idea, setting, characters, interaction between characters and dialogue... Getting any one aspect to kick ass by itself isn't enough. They each need to be optimized and work together. But all of that won't mean a thing if nothing happens.

You're going to need a plot. Now, for those of you familiar with my fiction, my blog or both, you'll note that plot ain't my best subject. And I've never pretended it was. So, you might be asking yourself what I could possibly advise when it comes to plot. Good question.

So, here's my disclaimer. If you want insight into how to derive complex and meaningful plots and eat into a reader's brain to leave an impression to last the rest of their lives - you're in the wrong place. That ain't my bag. But, just because I'm not a plot-driven author doesn't mean I don't know anything about what makes a story work and, more importantly, what doesn't. What you'll see here is my own take on basic plot do's and don'ts.

Before I get started on my own guidelines, I'd like to point out something I think is important. Plot is more than just action and forward movement; it's also cause and effect. Plot points lead to actions and movement, but they have to match and make sense just like characters do. The weaker the plot point (particularly those that are pivotal to the rest of the story), the weaker the story. Like say, a spaceport that only takes local currency and has no method of converting outworld money, including currency used by the rest of the galaxy. Think about it if it doesn't immediately strike you as asinine. If you have a rabid fanbase of fanatical supporters that will swallow anything, you might be able to get away with something so idiotic, even if it spawns off other nonsensical repercussions. However, those of us who aren't using spectacular special effects might want to give it more thought.

Cause and effect should make sense within the framework of the story. That doesn't mean it has to make sense in "this" culture or here and now or whatever, but, in the framework of the story, it must (note the example I just gave). But what repercussions fall out as a result of those causes, those plot points, have to make sense, too. Which doesn't mean events have to follow readily predictable lines or taking the "obvious" course, but, if there is an obvious alternative to your plot's path (particularly one that has notable advantages), you (the author) need to understand why you didn't take it and why you're going the way you are. The reasons don't even have to be good - just plausible. And you don't have to include them in the book, but you, the author, need to understand why you're going the way you are. Reasons that should be rethought include "I think it would be cool," "the story won't work if I don't do it this way," and "I just wanted to be different." Reasons like, "so-and-so has an aversion to flying," or "all technology on this world is biologically based," even if you just made them up, are fine as long as you follow through and are consistent with your own reasoning.

Don't make it more complicated than you can handle. The Count of Monte Cristo is my favorite example of a fantastic plot. Every word, every character, every event, even those that seemed minor and trivial, end up being woven into the final tapestry and pulled together in the end for a compelling denouement. How Dumas pulled that off before word processors I will never know. I know myself well enough to know I could never pull that off. I'd end up at the end with extra strands and all kinds of things I should have set up to make it work. So, I'll never write anything that complicated. If you can do it and know you can do it competently, more power to you. But if you can't, don't. Simplify. Prune. A clean flowing simple plot is much more palatable than a hopeless muddle of disjointed chains. Know your limitations, work your way up to where you want to be if you have to. But, if it's not working because it's too complicated to make sense, simplify. Remember, some of the most powerful plots are simple.

Keep the pace up. This is particularly important for us character writers. Things have to keep moving, the story advancing no matter how much you want to expose characters or indulge in entertaining dialogue or expand on descriptive periods. If you just realized you've wandered through three chapters and the story itself hasn't advanced, you need to rethink your pacing. Ideally, something is moving forward every chapter. If you find that the story really has very little advancing, very little "happening," you might want to flesh out your plot. If your story has a lot happening, but they happen with frenetic chapters of furious actions separated by chapter after chapter of exposition or amusing conversations, you might want to do some rearranging.

Eliminate dead ends, i.e. don't make it more complicated than it needs to be. (Which is not the same as not making it more complicated than you can handle). Many a time, I'm writing along and add a scene with tons of potential about a side path I can take. That I never follow through on. I love this scene. It's fun. It's entertaining. It's a visual you really love. It...blah blah blah. If this happens to you, cut it. A scene with unfulfilled potential is a broken promise and muddies up the plot. If the reader reaches the end of the book, as charmed as you were by your little extra scenes, and nothing's been done to bring those to closure, they're apt to feel disappointed.

People investing in series can get a little leeway on this, but you want as much of the story closed effectively as you can. The book should feel complete, a story that can stand on its own. Too many loose ends and it becomes a tease. As a reader, that irks me no end. Such dead ends also distract the reader from the plot you want and can even disappoint as the reader might have preferred the writer pursue that line instead of the main trunk. Note that mystery writers frequently install dead ends on purpose because it's supposed to be a maze, so take this suggestion with a grain of salt. Even so, for the rest of us, try to keep the focus on the plot points and actions that are key to the story and minimize anything that doesn't contribute.

Mix it up. Too much of anything, even stuff you like, can get old. Five chapters in a row with detailed battle action, even if action is your forte, can wear someone out. Ditto multiple heart-wrenching chapters or page after page of romantic interludes...too much of any one thing, especially in a row, can burn out a reader (and a writer). A plot like this:

Vicious battle action. Recovery and reflection. Battle strategy and maneuvering. Vicious battle action. More strategic maneuvering. Tragic aftermath as key character is killed. Recovery and reflection.

Is going to be easier to deal with than:

Vicious battle action. Vicious battle action. Vicious battle action. Strategic manuevering. Vicious battle action. Recovery and reflection. Tragic aftermath as key character was killed some chapters back. Recover and reflection, etc.

You can pile things on at the climax, but keep it moving, don't drag it on indefinitely. And mixing things up - because life rarely pauses as big events occur - is more like life and adds verisimilitude aside from also making it more palatable.

Make what happens interesting. It seems obvious, but you'd be amazed how often this doesn't happen. It's not enough for events to make sense and characters to be well-fleshed and compelling. Events need to be interesting enough to hold the readers interest. I like to think I'm an interesting person, but people would be bored to tears following me around on a regular day. If I want to be a character that excites interest, cool stuff ought to be happening to me or I need to be doing cool stuff. (Personally, I prefer characters that make their own destiny to the reactive kind but life, even in a book, is usually a combination of the two).

Truly, if you can't take your interesting characters and thought provoking setting that frames your clever premise and do something interesting with it, you're not getting the full potential from your idea.

And that, of course, was the whole idea of this series which, since I beat endings about to death, is now finished.

I hope you enjoyed it.

Wasted Potential: Talk the Talk

2011-06-17T22:18:00.004-05:00

Last time I talked about relationship between characters. One has to interact with the setting and in the plot, too, but I'm a big character person so that's where I tend to focus. One thing I didn't really get into, but should have, is a big aspect of both revealing a character and developing relationships: dialog.

I love dialog. I mean I really love dialog. If there's an aspect of writing I really take pride in, it's my dialog.

Ironically, even though I love dialog, in reality I don't speak like regular people do. Rather than let that bother me, I have a tendency to use that to my advantage. Why? Because I usually include at least one character who speaks much like I do (stupidly large vocabulary, esoteric words in ordinary usage and usually complete sentences). Those characteristics in speech pattern allow the reader to automatically pick up on many aspects of my character painlessly, making revealing him or her that much easier. It also provides contrast to other characters who speak in ways more in keeping with "typical," but even that varies by age and background and social standing, etc.

What I mean is dialog is a great way to provide contrast to your characters. The great character authors I know all get this. I can go back and read pages of dialog where I could completely skip the "so and so said" bits and I'd still know who was talking because the characters have distinctive voices and styles and concerns. If you go back and read your dialog (and read it out loud because nothing highlights crappy dialog like reading it out loud) and both sides sound the same, you'd better go back and fix it unless they're identical twins that share the same brain. Which would be cool, but I digress.

By varying the way people speak, you can readily portray youth, inexperience, education, attitude, thoughtfulness, emotionality, perspective... Really, everything. It's not just the things they say, but how they say it, their phrasing, vocabulary, syntax. Even the pauses and lack of speaking can say a great deal about character. Really, I can't stress enough how important, how vital, vibrant contrasting dialog is to making your characters distinct and alive.

A note about dialect: Most advice I've read on dialects and distinctly different pronunciation has said, "don't show it." As with most rules, I'm of the opinion that you should use that rule unless your story suffers by it. Truth is, reading dialect is hard for many people and, if readers are frustrated trying to figure out what the character's supposed to sound like or what they're saying, one can make a good argument that it's counterproductive. Additionally, and I mean this most kindly, most people can't write it believably worth a damn (and don't realize that they can't). That reason alone should give anyone pause before they decide to try, because, if the stuff that's right gives a reader pause, the stuff that sucks will make the reader pull their hair. And it makes the writer look like a hack. Probably not what you're going for.

Having said all that, dialect can provide a contrast. In generally, I do not advocate writing it all out phonetically, but putting in dropped consonants ("Just sayin'.") or specific words with a distinctive sound that speak to the character ("me darlin'" vs. "my darling" or even "dahling") can go a long way to setting a character apart and giving the reader a feel for a character's voice (or even "who" they are). I also have to mention that, when someone really nails dialect, it can be fantastic, as in James Herriot's hilarious memoirs, which would not be the same without the many many different dialects he puts in.

Give the dialog voice. Dialog can not only make or break your characters and their relationships, bad dialog can really bog down a story and make it sound fake. Stiff uninteresting dialog (particularly if it's used to expose some key elements) can quickly sound stilted and contrived, clumsy and, well, boring. Dialog should not sound like narration (unless you're deeply in third person POV and the narration has similar voice). Dialog should not sound like a news report; it does not need to be objective, unemotional or polite unless your character is. It should not sound professorial unless your character is. Witty characters should be sarcastic and smart, but every statement doesn't have to be a quip (in fact it can't be without sounding stupid). Put in emotions, stuttering, shocked pauses, inflammatory language, spoken (i.e. poor) grammar in as realistic way as possible. It needs to be alive and full of color and personality or you might as well have narrated it. Let me show you an example:

"Stop it," he said, when she flumped down next to him and laid her head on his shoulder. He shrugged to dislodge her, but she just moved with him and gave him a grin. "I'm trying to study here."

"You're always studying. My brother says you've become positively dull. Talk to me instead."

"Cory can speak for himself. If I'm so dull, go away." He could feel the heat of her body through his clothes and the distraction was sending his heart racing. "Don't you have something better to do than bug your brother's best friend?"

She hugged his arm and rubbed the side of her head against his shoulder. "No."

Vs.

"Gah! You brat, get off," he said, when she flumped down next to him and laid her head on his shoulder. He shrugged to dislodge her, but she just moved with him and gave him a grin. "Can't you see I'm working here? Some of us have to study."

"Ha! Like you need to study. My brother says you're already setting the curve. You never even come up for air. I'm doing my civic duty by peeling you away from those books before you turn into an old man. Play with me."

"Cory's supposed to be studying, too. If he's got a complaint, he can tell me himself instead of getting his kid sister to do his dirty work. Get lost before you catch my senility." He could feel the heat of her body through his clothes and the distraction was sending his heart racing. "Don't you social butterflies always have things to do? Shopping? Group trips to the bathroom? Facebook flaming? Why don't you flutter away and leave me in peace?"

She hugged his arm and rubbed the side of her head against his shoulder. "Peace? No way! That's the last thing I'm going to leave you with."

In the first one, though we're saying effectively the same thing (and everything outside the quotes is identical), there's an entirely different feel to the characters. In the first, he's studious and distracted by her presence (friend's sister) and she's trying to get his attention. However, it's not clear how he's affected, how well these two know each other, whether her rather attraction/distraction is deliberate or innocent. In the second, it's wordier, but we have a better sense of both him and her. You can get a sense of offense from being characterized as studious (and responds with an attack on her perceived frivolousness). Clearly, they know each other as more than just passing acquaintances. Just as clearly, she has some knowledge of her effect on him and is doing it deliberately.

Make it realistic but not too realistic. Real conversations between real people are, largely, dull. If you recorded your conversations with everyone you spoke to during the day, you'd be nodding off in minutes. We tend to talk inconsequential nonsense a large portion or the time. It's like certain sports - fun to play, dull as dishwater to watch. So, you need to excise those portions from real conversation that don't do anything for the story, for character development, for entertainment. You don't want movie dialog, quite, where (if written well) it's all witty and stuff. But you want a dialog that, if you heard it in a movie or a TV show, wouldn't make you want to switch channels. It's got to sound realistic (like people might actually have this conversation so not wall to wall quips and only significant statements) without sounding like a "typical" conversation with all the trivial nonsense. Again, I can't stress enough reading dialog out loud before you get happy with it. Get an audience if you can, one that will tell you the truth.

Don't say everything. People don't tell everything they're thinking, say everything that comes across their minds (except for a very very small number of irksome folks). So, if your characters explain everything, every key aspect of a situation, every nuance of their emotional state, they won't seem very realistic. People automatically edit. They keep some things secret ("You hurt my feelings by saying that.") or expect people to pick up implications ("Obviously, if someone so incompetent is getting a promotion, she's banging the boss."). If someone is telling another character about a problem, they will likely expect the other to pick up implications or deduce aspects. Expect your reader to do the same. Not too much. Being too cryptic can be frustrating as hell. But, don't fall into the TV Batman mode where you have to explain what happened, what that means and the step by step actions you're going to take to get out of the situation. Act, don't say, if you're going to act anyway.

Dialog is one place you can add "nonessential" writing. What I mean by that is not that you have pages of dialog that don't move the story forward or do anything useful. What I mean is that dialog is a good place to sneak in some humor, for example, even if it isn't essential for moving the story forward. A little lightness and humor can make a book more entertaining and is worthy even as just distraction. Similarly, a little character development or a bit of dialog that foreshadows a character aspect that explains a later action (that might otherwise be hard to comprehend) is time well spent. Your story might survive without it, but, by making it more alive, you can make it better.

Note also that people can comfortably spend time without talking. That speaks, too. Note also that conversations that provide information but don't add interest and character development might be better dealt with by saying, "Between hiccups, she gave him a disjointed account of her adventure. With comforting noises, he wiped her nose with no sign of impatience or confusion despite her digressions into incoherency." I can go through the dialog, but, if my readers already know, I'm not contributing much.

Next, plot.

Wasted Potential: Because Character's Not Enough

2011-06-12T11:06:00.007-05:00

Here's one of those subtle distinctions that, judging by many books I've read, people frequently miss. Having great character(s) in the world isn't enough alone. In order to use a character to his best potential, he's going to have to interact, not just with his environment, unless you've dropped him by himself on a desert island, but with other characters.

For nearly every story, the relationships and give and take between characters are how the story is pushed forward, how the characters learn and grow, how the characters reveal who they really are, warts and all.

A story with only one character is almost stuck telling not showing because it's how people treat each other, how they speak and act toward one another, what strikes them as funny or touching or infuriating that really shows who characters are. Even who they choose to befriend and why.

Seems obvious, doesn't it? Yet this is something authors frequently miss, throwing character mismatches together and forcing a relationship at odds with their personalities. Which isn't to say you can't have different and diverse people interacting together - far from it. Relationships in real life often flourish between people who vast differencest, but rarely 100% different. And friendly relationships are hardly the only kind you can put in your novel.

But the relationships have to be believable just like your characters have to be. Two best friends who never do anything but argue and impede each other (particularly if one is destructive to the other's personality) are not compelling or healthy. Two siblings who never argue are equally suspect. Disagreements, misunderstandings, hurt feelings, anger, all can be part of a healthy relationship, but to be really healthy it needs some real understanding, some support, some trust, some kindness, some compromise, perhaps some humor and some self-sacrifice.

In order to make a healthy relationship work for the story, to bring out the most of the characters (and, by extension, the the idea) there should be both connection and tension in key relationships. This allows growth and exposition painlessly for the reader. Perhaps the main idea provides the tension between them, a racial difference or economic divide. Maybe the idea is a great terror that provides the impetus to bind them together as they have to work on each others strengths against whatever "them" is in the story.

In order to do that effectively, you can't just say they're friendly or shoehorn friendly banter that's at odds with their characters. You have to craft characters that work together, that have complimentary strengths and workable differences. An group of people working together needs to be a team in real life with everyone contributing from their strong suits. In a novel, this is also true, whether the team is a pair or a dozen key players (with different goals and personalities) that make the story go.

And, as important as it is between protagonists and friendly side characters, it has to be so between antagonists and protagonists, too. People can hate each other for weak reasons and bad reasons and misunderstandings, but, in the novel, it's best that the reason plausible and make some sort of sense. A weak or poorly motivated villain is actually very dull and can bring a story to a screeching halt. The more justification the villain has, the more one can see his side of things, the more human he becomes, the more interesting, the more nuanced. Even if his original justification has been warped into something completely horrifying, that original motivation and injustice can really bring a story home to a reader. Can make it all the more real.

And, let's face it, making our dreams and imaginings real in someone else's mind, a reader's mind, is what it's all about. Or, at least it is for me.

So, bottom line, characters need to not only be layered and nuanced and realistically believable, they need to be crafted so that they interact effectively. It's both easier and harder than it sounds. But, if you can do it, really do it, you can really do wonders for an idea.

Wasted Potential: Casting Your Production

2011-06-06T15:46:00.002-05:00

Huh, I wish. Actually, no, creating characters is much easier than casting a play or movie (in that you're not limited by who's available or cost or such mundane things as race or gender or species for that matter), but, like world-building, much harder because you have to know/create your characters to a much deeper extent than is ever shown on paper, kind of everything that holds up the visible part of the iceberg (character) in your story.

On the other hand, it's fun.

Nothing kills a great idea faster than flat colorless characters. As a writer, you want characters that will get the most out of your idea. Using a great character that's conflicts with the idea is doubly wasteful, waste of a character and an idea, so characters should mesh readily with the idea. But they also need to be alive and have some sort of appeal (note, that doesn't mean they can't be assholes—more on that later). I don't have hard and fast rules on what kind of characters fit what kind of ideas. I think there's a certain level of trial and error, and any idea can be handled in multiple ways. A fun and whimsical idea can be done justice with a fun and whimsical hero/heroine, but a staid down-to-earth character, surrounded by insanity, can be just as effective in showcasing whimsy. In a similar manner, weighty powerful ideas can be furthered with properly built flighty airheads just like they can with somber individuals.

I've talked about characters before, so I'll be relatively brief. These are my own guidelines I think about when I'm building someone or would if I bothered to think in such an organized manner.

Can't be too perfect. A likeable character has to have room to grow because stagnation is not appealing. Nor is it likely to make the most of a concept. Ideally, he or she never actually becomes "perfect" because perfect is also boring and off-putting. People like to identify with characters, find some hook in the character that they can empathize with. Truly "perfect" people rarely appeal to anyone but self-important jerks. Unless that's your target audience, you need to give your character weaknesses, failings, and flaws.

And they have to be significant. The bigger, badder and more impressive your character is, the more debilitating their flaws need to be unless you want the reader to start rooting for the bad guy (which has it's own appeal - think Megamind). Let's face it, if Superman were a real character, he'd be an insufferable boor. His attachment to certain people, his excessive notion of personal responsibility and, of course, Kryptonite are the only reasons he can be tolerated. Everyone has something they fear. Everyone has something they can't bear to lose (and, if they don't, that's a tragic failing in and of itself).

Personally, the bigger and badder someone is physically, the more debilitating I like their mental issues to be whereas someone who's not quite so dangerous may be stalwart to the nth degree mentally., but that's just what I like.

Can't be a complete and utter turnoff. I'm not saying your hero can't be an asshole. There have been any number of successful asshole protagonists, but I maintain they need to have some appealing quality. If you're going to have an asshole as your lead, at least make him smart (witty's even better). Stupid assholes are notably short on charm. Or give him a soft spot, a line even he won't cross, hell, an embarrassing fetish. If you're going to have an idiot protagonist (and it can be done successfully), at least make him sweet. Making an idiot him stupidly lucky, patient and tolerant often goes a long way to making him palatable. Brash abrasive characters can have a tough history, a vicious sense of humor, or an untouchable core of honor. Maybe all three.

You're going to spend a lot of time with this character. You'd better like something about him or her. Your reader is, too, so you need to share those endearing bits. If the character is too off-putting, few will stick it out to find out how your idea pans out.

Make somebody funny. Even the weightiest topics can often do better with a bit of humor, without losing the sense of importance. Humor keeps things from becoming unreasonably weighty. It helps keep necessary plot building sequences entertaining. It provides contrast and charm, even if your main characters are short on both. It doesn't have to be laugh out loud or even constantly funny, but I've never known a book to suffer because of a judicious laugh or two in the mix.

One way, by the way, to make an otherwise unappealing character appealing is to make them funny, even if it's only once in a while. Or to provide them a cohort with some measure of absurdity.

Make them act real, in believable ways. Few things muddy a character like forcing them down a path at odds with their character. (Qui-Gon Jinn, from Episode I of Star Wars comes to mind and Liam Neeson knew it. You can see the distaste on his face when he had to do something out of character and/or stupid). That doesn't mean they can't ever do something "out of character" - real people do, but there needs to be a reason (even if you don't share it with the reader, you need to know it), one that works for the character as opposed to a reason like "furthering the plot."

The characters can be stupid, make mistakes, show poor judgement. In fact, if that's their character, you must have them behave so, just like you'll have to show evidence of cleverness if that's what they're supposed to be (saying they're clever isn't enough). I'm not saying what they do has to be good or bad. Most actions, however, have to be in keeping with who they are. Doing otherwise too much will blur your character out of focus.

Ah, I love this topic.

Wasted Potential - Got the Idea, Now What?

2011-06-04T18:22:00.004-05:00

So, honed and screened with a cold practical eye and some objective conjecture, you come up with a fantastic idea, an idea so full of potential and cleverness and creativity that the story will all but write itself. (Heh heh, if only!) Even if the rest of it is slapped together, the glory of this idea alone could get this book sold.

Well, I won't lie to you. That's happened. I don't know any reader who hasn't curled up with a book that had a fantastic idea only to leave disgusted, sometimes even a little sickened with the caliber of the results. Mostly, the results aren't that extreme, but leaving a reader feeling "meh" with an idea that sparkles is not what this series is about. It's about making a story live up to the potential of the idea. People have sold half-ass books that had unreached potential, but the only way you are likely to be remembered twenty years, heck, five years, down the line penning such things are as an author to avoid by disappointed readers.

Even a half-assed idea, if written well, beats that. But. You get a better book with a better idea if you make sure the rest of it is on par with the premise. Of course, like writing a book, doing so is easier said than done. Where do you start?

I like to start with venue (note that this is my preference; it's not the only choice). So ask yourself, where and when should this story be set? To determine the answer you need at least two things: what works with your idea and what works for you? The first part is self-explanatory; the second might not be.

Sometimes, of course, venue IS the idea: Imagine you're a yakuza kumi in Tokyo who's escaped the bloodbath that destroyed his entire gang with his leader's nine-year-old daughter and they have to escape the city, if not the country, without getting killed, for example. Chances are you're talking about the present or near future/recent past and, of course, Tokyo. Often times, however, things aren't so clear. In a drastically male-dominated society, a girl is raised like a man but is eventually exposed as a woman. Rather than cower in her gender-based role, she uses the power she garnered pretending to be a man and her very impressive skills to carve out a spot for her in a unforgiving environment. Where and when can you set this? On earth, you can choose from any period of time ever and find oppressively male dominated societies (including the year we're in now) and in nearly every culture. For science fiction or fantasy, the options are equally broad-based.

So, how do you choose? Well, I suggest starting with the second question: what works for you? What do you read? What do you know? What are your interests?

If you're really not interested in history and or willing to treat it with some objectivity, I'm begging you to forgo setting it in a historical locale. No, seriously. For those of us who love history (and I do), having the past mangled past recognition by the well-meaning is torturous. Setting it in the past is fine, however, if you know the culture and the limitations. For instance, in most cultures, making our little lady a stand-out in hand-to-hand combat is a real challenge, not so much because women can't kick butt (with some limitations) but because, through most periods of time up to and including today, soldiers live in close quarters. You just can't get away without that kind of secret in most fighting venues. Make her a thief or an assassin, someone in the underworld, however, and you can do so. (Just, for mercy's sake, don't have her taking baths and smelling sweet in the 1600s. Really.) But it will sound contrived as hell if you don't (a) really know your period and (b) not just the literature of the times almost exclusively geared to the upper classes. You have to know about the underworld if you're using it or you shouldn't be using it. And you need to know the language, the dialects, the habits and trends of the time, clothing and contemporary events.

Ditto for using a modern venue but an exotic culture. Don't use mass media or (seriously) any biased base to determine the appropriate culture to set your work and, if you use one, you need to know it intimately (and I don't mean a trip wandering through). Living there for some time is optimum. Studying them in depth might work, but use a variety of sources and be careful you don't wander in with your preconceived notions at the fore. Ideally, you set such a story in a culture you know well, understand, can even see from both sides. Ask flit, oppressive places are closer than you know.

If you want to go the science fiction/fantasy route, as I do, that doesn't mean you don't have to do any work. World building takes far more effort than setting things in a convenient locale. You get to make the rules, but you have to keep them, too, and the rules have to makes sense (usually in comparison to actual history). Sounds easy, it's not. But, the freedom and options available to tailor a world to fit an idea is certainly part of the charm. It's one of the reasons I so often write there. Note that, by doing so, you limit your audience. There is still a rather sizeable faction that thinks science fiction and fantasy is hack work and nothing like literature. Just sayin'. For many who love reading this kind of thing, this is the only place to work.

If, after looking at your own abilities and interests, you still find the choices overwhelming on where to put your clever idea, look at the idea itself. Sure, it might work anywhere, but what aspects did you want to highlight? "Male-dominated society" can go several different extremes from repressive sexually to women being property to being "apparently" equal but still having the deck stacked against them. You need to know what kind would best serve your purposes before you pick one. Find one where a woman coming to the fore is a challenge but not laughably impossible.

In the end, you need to find the setting that works best for your work, rural vs. urban vs. nomadic, perhaps. Modern or futuristic or fantastical. Find what will let you milk the most from your idea, what will give you the most opportunity to let that idea shine. When you've got something, do your research (or world building) to make sure you can portray it correctly.

Then it's time to do my favorite part: make characters.

Sidebar: Send a message, not a sermon

2011-05-31T20:48:00.005-05:00

Agents and publishers frequently express concern about stories sent them with a distinct message, noting such stories are frequently heavy-handed with the story subverted by the need to make the message plain. Stories completely focused on such messages are often preachy, condescending and, much worse, boring and pompous. The stories, twisted to suit the message, come off contrived and clumsy.

This not only makes a crappy story, it does a rotten job of sending a message. Anyone with kids can tell you beating a kid over the head with a message is no way to get them to learn. Example is, and will always be, the best way of communicating behavior and life lessons, as many a parent has learned the hard way. Do as I say and not as I do–you're dreaming if you think that's any way to raise a child. But, if a child understands why something is, if they see the effects of what you do, that can make an impression they don't even consciously recognize. Which is why so many adults discover they're channeling their parents when they deal with their own children–to their chagrin.

But, as I said last time, I don't think a story sans message is even feasible. I don't think you can have challenging situations and characters that grow and react to those situations without sending messages: what are good things to do, what are bad things to do, how those reactions reflect on you, what society does as opposed to what it should do. Sometimes the stories speak of a situation that needs changing by shining light on the parts people in the "clean world" don't like to believe actually exist. These are the ones that most easily can slip into sermon. However, that same subject can be just as clearly portrayed as a backdrop on a story, having repercussions naturally through the story without subverting it or being the focus. The message comes through as thoroughly, if not more thoroughly, because it feels true, it feels real instead of contrived. It doesn't subvert the story which can be as positive or negative as one's heart desires.

However, even stories with no axe to grind whatsoever still have something to say, a natural fallout of characters that grow. The messages might not be uplifting: "sometimes bad things happen no matter what you do," "some people can't be trusted," "people are stupid," etc. Sometimes, they're light: "live a little" or "sometimes love is enough." But even fluff can have something important to say, can say it unmistakably without getting weighed down or even precluding entertainment. The less the reader notices the message, the more effective it likely it might be, because that often means the reader has identified with the message so absolutely they already agree or they've just absorbed it as natural.

As soon as your message starts to make the story unnatural, you're doing the neither the message nor the story any good. In the interest of stopping with the dead horse beating, let me give you some examples from my own works.

Curse of the Jenri: Badass Amazon-like women (Jenri) excel in magic and armed combat and marry men outside their tribe because they can't have male children. Tander, happy-go-lucky mercenary, and Layla, serious top level Jenri, are married. Tander has to embrace his "shameful" magical talents and ally himself with others in order to rescue his wife and others from top level magic-wielders (tolerance, using one's potential fully, learning responsibility). Layla's prideful self-sufficiency nearly gets herself and others killed because she keeps her problems hidden. Flashbacks to Jenri show how an oppressive and abusive environments can warp one's character, drive one to do what one would never do otherwise, but also how kindness can promote healing. With my badass Jenri, feminism is a rather natural fallout. Most of this is not specifically driven but falls naturally out of the story. I don't know how, in fact, I could tell the story without saying all these things that I believe. I don't have to state them directly (though I sometimes do via one character or another). The story tells it for me.

Beast Within - Xander (dragon), and his secret group of shapeshifters, is stranded with a large group of refugee children on a remote planet with no hope of escape. The planet might kill them if they don't use all their shapeshifter talents. The humans might kill them if they find out they're shapeshifters (as many humans consider shapeshifters and those with psionic talents "demons"). Fear of that makes the shapeshifters willing to kill to protect their secret. Xander is the leader (though not the oldest) because he is the strongest in his animal form, but he fears his perceived "weakness" and his other form because of his father's abuse. He must embrace his strengths and overcome his own fears of his other self in order to have his group (and the humans) survive. He must also stand firm on doing the right thing rather than succumb to fear or lose his humanity and precious abilities. This is a story all about what one is vs. who one is. Xander (who begins the story with a great deal to be proud of if only he knew it) must learn to appreciate his own abilities and those realizations and what the behavior of both shapeshifters and humans do (and their prejudices) are what propels the story forward.

Tarot Queen - smart precognitive has spent centuries locked up in a little house, not really living. Enter the demon, Dante, whom she wishes to free from his demon possession so she can become his lover. She must leave her safe but boring life behind and discovers reality's a lot more challenging than she thought, but also that she can do a great deal more than she ever imagined if she doesn't stand in her own way. Dante, long cynical and uncaring, having lived a (really long) life where everything came too easily, realizes that loving something precious is its own reward, and more than a little frightening because most things are more fragile than he is. What he/she is vs. who he/she is is also a big player in this story.

Catspaw - Hotheaded shapeshifter (Laren) with a chip on his shoulder finds himself thrust into leadership when Xander (the star of Beast Within) falls deathly ill. Only by keeping a rein on his temper will he be able to think his way through the dogpile of catastrophes that fall naturally from Xander's illness. In doing so, Laren finds he understands more about his fosterbrother (Xander) than he ever did before and discovers the world isn't nearly so black and white as he'd often thought, especially as he finds himself drawn to a human. Hard to hate them when you love one. Who vs. what (from the other side) again.

Saving Tessa - Rich, intelligent and self-sufficient, Dylan's life revolves around his best friend/girlfriend, Tessa. Without her, his life would be an endless succession of work that neither inspires nor challenges him. Tessa does both. When she is stolen to coerce him, he must come to grips with his own limitations and trust Tessa's own abilities to take care of herself. In many ways, this is a character study for Dylan, because no one can do everything themselves. Everyone has something to lose. This isn't a big overarching theme story, but more a study in a relationship where we learn more about what makes a healthy relationship than just "love." Or that could just me be.

One thing you want to avoid, besides the heavy hand of preachiness, is building a story where the message you're sending isn't the one you thought it was. I think Frankenstein is a good example of this. In my opinion, Mary Shelly seemed to be saying that the "monster" was inherently evil because he was an unnatural creature that man should not have created. But, when I read the story, the monster doesn't seem evil at all, but a creature, abandoned and reviled for no other reason that what he is, who is driven to desperation to obtain even a chance of happiness, only to have that happiness thwarted time and again, whether he uses exemplary methods or violence.

Let's not forget the far-too-common message many modern romances send that rape's acceptable if the guy really loves you ('cause nothing says "I love you," like violent rape). I'll stop there or I'll be beating dead horses again. Oy!

The point I'm trying to make is that a writer should understand what messages fall out of the story. He shouldn't bludgeon the story to produce the message he wants, but he might want to rethink the story if the messages he's making aren't ones he wants to send.

Wasted Potential - Making the Most of a Workable Idea

2011-05-27T13:20:00.002-05:00

Even the best and/or most original idea isn't enough to make a story great. There are many ingredients to cooking up a great story, but before we start sautéing characters, seasoning up the story with settings and details and scheduling plot elements, you need to know if you've completed the work on the idea itself.

Say what?

Like the caliber and cut of meat makes a difference in how it's prepared and what you can do with it, an idea needs to be fully understood and conceptualized to get the most of it. Before you take an idea and start scribbling, you might want to ask yourself what you want to say with this idea, where you want it to go and what the appropriate scope is for the story that comes out of it. Maybe not in that order. Or maybe.

What do you want to say? I've mentioned before that I think a story, of any length, should have something to say. Not necessarily a moral, but, in my opinion, messages are brought forward as part and parcel of a story where characters grow and events take place. I've talked about this before and I maintain that a story with nothing to say is probably not worth the time to read it. I'm not pro-sermon; I just don't even know how you tell a story without imparting some sort of message. I think it happens whether you intend it to or not, with how your characters grow and what happens to them In my opinion, you should be aware of this, cognizant, so you're imparting the messages you want.

What kind of messages? Anything can be a message and a message don't have to be "good." Your message might be "Life isn't fair," or "No one can be trusted," or "Everyone has a price." Many books that touch on murder or war have those kind of lessons as part of messages that come with it. It might be "Love stinks." It might be that being happy is worthwhile for itself ("Entertainment for its own sake"). An idea can lend itself to social commentary like gender/racial/religious/philosophical differences and/or tolerance. Done with care, you might be able to illuminate both sides of the issue (since many issues are not black and white). It might be half a dozen related things. But you should know what concepts you want to pursue and promote that fall out of that original idea. I like to, anyway.

Where does the idea lead? Many a great idea has been murdered ignominiously by a poor understanding of realistic implications. Events and repercussions what followed from the original premise were either so unnatural or nonsensical that the useful cleverness of the original idea was lost in the stupidity. If what you want to say and the idea and its realistic consequences are at odds, you the writer either need to change what you want to say, change your idea or you're going to have a mess. That doesn't mean that there is only one path for the idea to progress, or that one set of realistic consequences exist per idea, but what falls out of the original idea has to makes sense, has to follow along lines that seem reasonable, even if the original idea is fantastic.

Understanding the implications of your idea from the get go can also do a great deal to help determine what kind of characters you need, where they'll be going and who they'll be facing. It's a little extra effort up front but far better than trying to force a story in the wrong direction later on or finding oneself on a path that leads...nowhere.

What is the scope of the idea? Some ideas are big and sweeping, so big with so many opportunities that a single book can't even do it justice. Even an in-depth character study and growth of a primary character can drive a series of books. Sometimes, though, the idea is more an single event or image, a circumstance that make one go, "What if XXX happened?" The magnitude and impact of such ideas might expand to fill a book (okay, or more than one book) or might be fully explored in the course of a short story or play.

So, how do you know? Well, I don't think there's one rule. Everyone doesn't work the same way. However, there are some things I ask myself. First of all, it makes a difference if this is a story that involves a large group of people rather than being tightly focuses on one or two. What I mean is that, if the story is completely centered on two people with other characters being minor to the central story, I'm not planning a series of books. If I'm focused on just a couple (since romance is frequently an element), chances are I'm thinking of a stand alone book or a short story. Ensemble casts, however, especially with multiple key characters, lend themselves to sagas. Similarly, if what I'm trying to say is complex and sweeping and has many contradictory facets, chances are it's more than I can manage in a short story and may drive more than one book.

Despite my not being a planner, I usually take a bit up front to understand an idea when I get it, where it's going, what it tells me (that I might impart to the reader) and how big an idea it really is. Sometimes, I get surprised, but mostly it lets me start out on the right foot toward telling the story I think the idea merits.

Wasted Potential - Sifting Out Good Ideas

2011-05-23T16:44:00.005-05:00

When one talks about the potential of a project, people, writers and readers, often assume it's all about the original idea, the premise behind the story. That's only part of the story and it's a big part, but, the premise that gets the story started is only part of it because it's not just the idea, but what you want to do with it that's important. That's key to everything else in your story.

I've never spent much time talking about generating ideas because (a) writer how-to books frequently devote tons and tons of time and effort into how to get ideas and (b) generating ideas is not and never has been my problem. If I wrote to fruition every workable idea I've come up with to date, I'd be busy, 24/7, for three or four lifetimes at least. And I expect to come up with more ideas. However, the devotion to coming up with ideas makes it pretty clear that it's not that easy for everyone. Moreover, getting an idea doesn't equate with success; you have to know how to tell a good idea from one that stinks and you need to understand how an idea must be filled in and completed to make the story work.

I joke, since I'm a character driven author, that I often start with a premise and throw my characters into it, while I sit back and take notes. I do that but it's also an oversimplification partially because that's funnier and partially because my subconscious does most of the real work. It only works if you know what you're trying to say with your idea, and if you've worked the idea to effectively say what you want it to say. Your characters have to align with this, too, but I'll touch on them a different post.

The idea has to be plausible. Not real-world plausible, but fiction world plausible. So, since it's fiction, anything's plausible, right? No. There's physical world plausible (and that can be twisted and skewed in fantasy and paranormal work fairly easily) and, more importantly, societal plausibility. You can start from almost any point in the world, any realm, but the idea and premise have to make sense within that framework. The weirder the starting point, the more assiduous you must be in making the rest of it make sense within that realm (unless you're writing strictly broad comedy). I've touched on this notion before here, here and here. Well, it still holds.

Every world, every place in the time/space continuum has rules, whether or not they resemble the ones here or not. The fewer here-and-now real world rules you use, the more you have to make up and follow. If you write historical fiction, you are even more constrained (or one of those hacks that make me hate to read much of today's historical fiction). So the idea has to be plausible within the paradigm you're writing. Note that "real world" doesn't have to be limited to "American." Just sayin'.

An easy way to test a notion (even a wild fantasy notion, since we're talking societal plausibility at least) is to look at history. Has what you're envisioning or an analog ever occurred? Did it ever go the way you'd envisioned? If yes, you can safely say your idea is plausible (though you need to be aware of the circumstances that made it so - more on this later). If not, you've got to sit down with yourself and make sure you understand the reasoning on why it's plausible in your case. If you think it would be "cool," "should" have happened that way but didn't or is just necessary to further your plot, history and logic bedamned, you might want to rewind or reboot. You've failed the plausibility test.

But, even if history shows examples of the same sort of idea leading in the direction you're going, beware. If you have a fairly agnostic society, for instance, don't set up a Spanish Inquisition type scenario unless you have an equally mind-numbing conscience-soothing philosophy with a similar amount of power to religion. Patriotism can work (think Nazis), but you need to understand what's been done to use it. Fortunately, history has many examples. It's your responsibility to ensure that your idea, your notion, your paradigm makes sense in its own context. Don't cheat on this. Don't skimp. Don't shrug this off. Start a story have a crappy idiotic premise (and, yes, it can be done), you'll have to work extra hard to get anything worthwhile out of it. On the other hand, frequently, the germ of a notion, with a little research and thought, can be made into a very workable believable premise. Ideally, you want to start with something like that, something that makes sense without you, the writer, having to expend tons of extra time justifying it.

Bottom line, if you have to spend more time explaining why your premise works than describing the premise, start over.

"Never before seen." Many people get excited over a unique idea because "no one's ever done it before." Well, rein in a second there. First, don't count on it never having been done before. Chances are, someone somewhere has done something like whatever you're thinking about. I mean, there have been a lot of people born and dreaming in this world. But, whether it's truly original or just so rare it feels unique, that doesn't make it a good idea.

One reason you might not have heard about it (if someone else has also thought of it) is that it was just a bad idea. Yes, that happens. If you've no indication that anyone has ever done anything like that, make sure you think long and hard about whether or not that means the idea is a real stinker.

But it might also be a great idea that's challenging to pull off, either because it's complex or confusing or requires extensive know-how or any of a dozen other reasons. If a great idea gets butchered by well-meaning hacks enough times, it can be hard for anyone to take it seriously. If you have an idea you think is fantastic and unique, sit down and think it through, make sure you have the knowledge and tools you need to do it justice. More on that in later posts.

Old standby ideas. So, let's say the idea you want to pursue isn't that unique or original. Let's say, in fact, it's been done to death. Should you stop? Not necessarily. Pretty much 99% of the most successful works done this past century are based on tried and true ideas, things that have been done before. But (and it's a big but), the authors/directors/producers put their own unique spin on those old ideas and made them fresh and approachable.

Classic concepts and ideas are that way because they have broad if not universal appeal, because they build on universal truths and human nature. But, if you don't have a unique take on it, a unique twist, a clever variation, you'll just be telling a story that someone's already told. Seriously. And that's not good.

The more classic and timeless your notion, the more effort it is to make it special, unique and interesting. Making it entertaining is always good, but, if you want to make it something special, you're going to have to add something new or give it a serious makeover. You'd best do your research to make sure your clever and unique twist isn't a rehash of someone else's.

Make sure the idea appeals. Having a cool unique idea or a clever take on a classic idea, however plausible, isn't enough, though. It needs to have appeal, speak to someone (at least you). As a writer, you're going to be spending a great deal of time with the idea and characters supporting this idea - it better be something you like or you're not going to enjoy yourself. But, even if it's entirely your kind of thing, if you're hoping to get someone to read it, you need to think about what will appeal to others as well. Who is your target audience? What about your idea do you think will appeal to them? What will the reader identify with or find compelling? If you don't know, you ought to. At least know what makes it appeal to you.

But the getting the germ of the idea, the premise, isn't enough. You've got to make that idea into something and figure out what you're trying to say with it. More on that next post.

Wasted Potential - Introduction

2011-05-21T10:34:00.004-05:00

I reread the manga that got me started railing on endings. I'll be writing a review of it over on Unlikely Otaku later (partially to get it off my chest and partially because if I gush about my current favorite manga, I'll have to reread that whole thing and I've read it twice this week already).

But the issue I have with that (bad ending) manga is one common to all kinds of story telling media, from movies to stories to novels to, well, pick one. That problem: wasted potential.

There is nothing I hate more than reading/watching something that should have been good, that had the elements for being good, even great, and turned out disappointing. Even if the end product is "good," if it's only a shadow of what it could have been, I end up feeling let down. Frustrated. Even angry. An example that leaps to mind include the movie 9.

Contrast that to my general pleasure at watching or reading something where I didn't expect much because the idea seemed stupid or uninteresting, and yet I ended up really finding it compelling nonetheless. Something as absurd in conception as say, Edward Scissorhands, by way of superlative acting and careful and clever handling, becomes an unexpected charmer.

If you're going to err, the latter is the way to go. In other words, handling even the silliest notion with care and skill can still be a winner whereas inept or careless treatment of even the best ideas will lead to utter failure. Particularly notable failure, because wasted potential is a broken promise to the customer: I had something that should have been great and didn't deliver. People remember those that have let them down. I sure as hell do.

That doesn't mean everything one writes has to be classic or great literature, but it needs to deliver on its potential. If it's escapist adventure, make sure its exciting and entertaining. Keep the writing crisp, the pace brisk, the humor bright and the pathos to a minimum. Make the characters deep enough so the reader cares about their fates, but not so deep and convoluted to drag the story down. If it's a romance, the characters need to be deeper, their relationship compelling even if the premise or story isn't as as strong.

However, making those secondary elements stronger makes the whole package better and can change a little bit of escapist literature into a favorite book. Make the story stronger, the plot plausible, the humor entertaining, and a romance novel stands out against in a sea of "meh."

Writing a novel is much like making a complex meal. You want the best ingredients, of course, but how you cook them, in what proportions, when you offer them, even how you present them, all matter to making a satisfying eating experience. You can't dump even the best ingredients for a five course meal into a blender, purée then pour into a pan and bake it and expect it to be satisfying, even if you shave black truffle over it.

I suspect many would-be writers get caught by this, falling in love with an idea, thinking it's so cool but not realizing that that's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to crafting a satisfying story. They're dazzled by the potential of the idea and can't see that what they've delivered is still raw on the inside or poorly proportioned, because they see the product they wanted it to be.

So, I'll be talking about getting the potential out of my ideas, my stories, my characters, what I do to try make sure I don't break any promises for my readers.

And, yeah, it's another multi-parter.

Change-a-Roo

2011-05-16T19:46:00.003-05:00

Before I sally forth to address other plot and story related topics with regards to novel writing, I'd like to make an announcement. My largely neglected (mostly by myself) blog, Ask Me Anything, is getting reworked to address my current fascination with manga/anime which, after more than four nonstop months, is still going strong. As in I'm going to try to learn how to read Japanese which puts me, I think, a step beyond a dabbler. The new title is "The Unlikely Otaku" where otaku is a term to describe an obsessive fan of some form of media or another.

How does it affect this site? Well, in some ways it doesn't except that I won't be writing any more manga obsessed entries over here. Here, I'll be sticking to writing related topics. I will, at least for the time being, keep the manga widget, but it might eventually be replaced with books I recommend reading and why. Eventually.

I will also be, slowly over time, removing my manga entries from here and reposting them on The Unlikely Otaku without the comments (so if you said something insightful and still want it, you'll have to go comment again). The widget here will be duplicated over there and both will be updated as I transfer things over.

It's not particularly important, except to me, as I'm excited about making a venue for myself to continue to explore why I find this manga/anime worldl so fascinating. Some of it might bleed over here, but only if it has a direct bearing on my novels (and, yes, manga has had an impact on no less than four of my five completed novels).

The other impact is that, if someone has a question they just have to get addressed (that isn't writing or manga related), they'd best put it on Rocket Scientist, since this blog will now be fully focused on reading/writing and Unlikely Otaku is focused on manga/anime. Rocket Scientist I'm leaving to catch everything else, which isn't much at this moment.

Endgame Part 4 - Everything Else

2011-05-12T13:34:00.000-05:00

So, if we take out happy-ever-after endings, revelation and climax endings, what's left?

Everything else. And, yeah, that doesn't all fit tidily into categories.

But, never fear because I'm going to give you my insight into rules of thumb for any type of ending (which may or may not apply to the special endings I've already described—use your own judgement). These are things I keep in mind when writing the ending, including where to end the story.

First and foremost, remember the point of your story. Point of the story? What if it's just a frothy romp for entertainment? Nothing wrong with that. But, if your story is just to entertain the reader with a charming story or fun characters, don't kill them all in an earthquake or strike one down with AIDS. By doing so, the point of your story (having fun with fun people) has been subverted with an ending that sucks the joy out of it. That doesn't mean you can't have fun frothy adventures that end in despair, but the seriousness of the consequences, the reality that lurks behind the adventure needs to poke through in the story before the ending. Or the reader will feel cheated.

But most stories have something to say. It might be minor or even cliche, but the characters should all be striving and growing, be motivated by something or learning something. The ending needs to be working with that, part of that, in keeping with that intent. If the story involves the striving of people to be together against the odds, having them go their separate ways for spurious reasons at the end will be irksome. Give them good reasons, remembering their time together fondly, that's fine. But you don't want the reader getting to the last page and "Why did they try so hard for so long just to throw it all away?"

Some books have a very significant import, highlighting important issues like child abuse or war. Given the import of those topics, even if the story ends happily, it shouldn't be too easy, too tidy, too pat. There need to be scars and struggles with the ending emphasizing how challenging correction can be or the topics themselves become easy to dismiss.

The key is to not to lose sight of what you're trying to say. Bad things and good things can both happen at the end, hope from despair, reality striking fantasy, as long as you haven't subverted why you told the story for in the first place. That doesn't mean the guy gets the girl—perhaps giving up the girl is the greater expression of love, the greatest available. That doesn't mean tragedy is prevented, but you need to be careful about making every effort in the book seem futile. Hopelessness rarely makes a reader feel good about the reading experience. The key is that the ending should be part of the message, instead of negating it.

Don't be a tease. This goes somewhat hand in hand the first one. A novel is something like a promise that you build on over time. You're telling the reader what kind of book it is, what to expect from and for the characters. If you promise hot and heavy romance, having your main characters meet for coffee and then go their merry way is not likely to leave the reader feeling satisfied. If the book is all about someone training and striving to succeed at something, having them come in seventh with no fanfare or no particular reason can be frustrating. Why, again, did I bother suffering with this character? The ending needs to deliver on at least some of that promise, even if it doesn't happen to be exactly the way expected.

It can be tempting to pull a sneaky and do something shocking at the end. That's fine, but you can't break your promise. You don't have to give the reader the obvious solution, but you have to deliver something as good or better. Not necessarily happier, but as satisfying and meaningful as what the reader was hoping for. Pulling a quick change at the end just so it's NOT predictable is like trotting out a new suspect in a mystery at the last minute and making them the culprit. It's a cop-out and a cheat. The last thing a writer should want to do is have the readers feeling cheated. So, take a look at your novel, at the hints and breadcrumbs you left along the way, the promises and teases you offered on what the reader can expect and make sure you fulfilled those promises, even if it wasn't the way the reader might have expected.

Give the reader time to grieve. Tragedy can be a very effective part of an ending. Reality can be harsh and misfortune, even "senseless" misfortune, is part of it. But, if you, the writer, have taken the time to get your reader to know and love a character who is struck by tragedy, you need to give the reader time to grieve, either before the tragedy (seeing it coming like say, Love Story or Tale of Two Cities) or after the fact by allowing the reader (and the other characters) to come to terms with what's happened. Killing off the couple's toddler three pages before the end or losing one's mentor in the last paragraph can leave the reader without the ability to come to terms with their own loss if they've become entrenched with the character. It doesn't mean you can't kill off favorite characters or visit tragedy, just that you have to help the reader come to terms with the loss just as the characters must.

Don't wind down indefinitely. Just as it applied to the happily ever after endings, for heaven's sake, bring the story to a close within a reasonable timeframe. Everything that happens after the climax should serve a purpose to the story: cleaning up loose ends, bringing everyone into a stable condition, letting everyone come to terms with tragedy (and you need time for this, but don't let it drag on indefinitely)—you know, tidying up. Character exposition and development, adventures, should be minimized after the main core story has reached it's climax. Make it entertaining, sure, but don't take on chapters or episodes during this crucial period for no purpose other than entertaining. If it's not part of the winding down and putting the story to bed, move it to before the climax or let it go.

Foreshadowing with care. I have said and I maintain that a novel should be self-contained and complete, not leaving key story-arc issues unresolved or key characters in imminent destruction. However, some books, particularly those intended to be part of a series, frequently have an on-going conflict above and beyond the current story arc. In those cases, having a few loose ends to be tugged and tied in a later volume is fine as long as this story arc is complete, as long as someone can get a satisfying and complete story from this novel. In such cases, particularly if you know there are more books to come (or even if you want to leave the option open), a certain measure of foreshadowing is a fine way to end things...as long as you don't actually start a new story arc. Whether you note the existence of a particular threat or remind the reader of how much work is still to be done, despite the successes of *this* battle, a little hint that there's more to come is fine.

About horror. The guidelines I've been discussing on endings largely don't apply to horror (with the possible exceptions of denouement/climax endings) because the intent of a horror novel is generally less about satisfaction and more about being unnerving. That doesn't mean you can't have a satisfying ending, just that it's not necessarily the best choice. To get the effect you're looking for in your horror novel (depending on what your intent is) might mean killing off beloved characters at the last minute or leaving promises dangling, even nudging your characters to the cliff edge. In those cases, one can deliberately add to the disturbing effect of the story itself by leaving the ending, well, not so ending-ish.

I have an announcement on a revamping of my Ask Me Anything blog and then I'll move off into other plot related topics here. Stay tuned as it were.

Endgame Part 3 - The Happily Ever After Ending

2011-05-01T13:10:00.000-05:00

The denouement ending is hardly the only one that's cliche. In fact, most type of endings tend to get done to bits because, let's face it, there are only so many ways to end something. But there are variations within those types of endings that make them suitable to certain types of stories and certain story resolutions.

For instance, the "happy ever after" ending (and variations thereof) is ubiquitous to romance novels but you can find them in all kinds of novels that (a) end happily and (b) aren't in a series. Although it's as cliché as possible, it's also effective and satisfying if done properly (more on that later), but it's also not appropriate for dealing with stories that have ugly or tragic endings or stories that are part of a larger saga where we'll be revisiting our characters elsewhere. A happily-ever-after ending is well suited to romance or adventure or character-driven stories where our characters end up in a happy place.

Happily-ever-after endings have tremendous variations. Some follow so closely on the climax or revelation ("I love you!") they could look like a climax/revelation ending, but there are several key factors that makes them different.

First, the relationship situation must be resolved—love confessions made and accepted, friendships, partnerships, and familial relationships clarified and perhaps celebrated. Generally, the action/excitement climax has happened before we clean up the relationship aspect. So, though the relationship climax may be on the last page, chances are good the action/danger aspects have generally already been resolved. This relationship resolution can be simple and straightforward ("I love you, you know." "I know.") or complicated as one likes, taking paragraphs or whole chapters. Note that all relationships don't have to be resolved, but the key relationships of the main characters (including with each other) need to be.

The situation of the main characters have to be in a good position for the long haul. That means they're not dealing with horrible tragedy to struggle through or left in a situation where the end result is in question. That means, if they're left stranded in a lifeboat, we need to be certain rescue is coming. That means that one can't be dying of cancer unless a miracle cure is on the horizon. However, it does not mean the hero and heroine are a couple, or married, or even romantically involved in any way, just that they're both satisfied with the relationship as it has become. It does not mean that all their problems are solved—they don't have to win the lottery or have their dream jobs or make their business a success. Asthma doesn't have to be cured or the pegleg regrown, as long as the characters are content with the lives that face them. It doesn't mean that the main characters got what the wanted (gold metal), just that they're happy anyway.

All of this doesn't have to be overt either. Our main characters can just resolve/clarify the relationship, with the reader left to conclude that all is well. ("And they lived happily ever after." Or "Let's go home." etc).

Or it can be overt (even exhaustingly so). There are a whole slew of options on how to show this, including considerable time with characters post "resolution" that allow both relationship/future to be further clarified and some/all of side threads tied up. Or, there's the ever-popular foreshadowing of the future with glimpses of near or far future with situations that clarify long-term success either with walks down the aisle, watching a child graduate or the infamous old couple celebrating their umpteenth anniversary.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the happily-ever-after ending in my opinion. I've used it for three out of five novels. It's well suited, particularly, to character-driven novels when, even when the story's effectively ended, you're not quite ready to let the characters go. But, there are dangers and a reader should be aware of them.

Making everything too happy. If everything tidies itself up perfectly, with all conflicts resolved to the best possible outcome and our main characters cooing at each other incessantly, I won't be the only reader with his or her stomach turning. Life isn't that tidy and having everything too rosy is a good way to alienate the reader or to make even a very believable appealing story come off sounding false. Nor am I the only one who tends to think idealized relationships are probably doomed.

Dragging it out too long. It's hard, when you have characters you love, not to add bits and pieces to share with readers you hope love them too. Still, once the story arc is ended and the crisis is past, there's only so long you can drag out the thread-tying and relationship clarifying/reveling without boring the reader to death. Happy relationships, I might add, are boring relationships to the outside most of the time. Set up what you need to so the reader is comfortable with where they are and where they're going, then leave the rest for the reader's imagination. I have a rule of thumb that, post climax, the book should end within two chapters (and only that long if you have some big pieces that still need to be put into place). Not saying that has to be your rule, but if you look back and see the story climax happening nine chapters back, you might want to ask yourself if (a) you need everything afterwards and (b) what resolutions you might be able to clear up before the climax so that it can wind down a bit faster.

Happy endings fall in and out of fashion, even if there are some genres where they are de rigeur, but there's nothing wrong with one as long as it's not too sugary and not dragged out too long. End it when you have the resolution you need and not beyond that point. Keep the characters as charming and entertaining as they need to be until the end.

The goal is to leave the reader satisfied, not bored, not anxious.

More endings to come.

Endgame Part 2

2011-04-27T15:55:00.002-05:00

So, if climax and denouement endings are powerful and have great impact, why not end all your novels that way? Well, because they have limitations.

There isn't one perfect ending type for every story because it depends on what story you're telling and, largely, what the focus of the story is, what the emotional draw to the story is.

In general, you see climax and denouement endings on plot driven books where the emotions being drawn from the reader are terror, suspense, tension, excitement, where the story is all about the circumstances or the mystery, the danger of a situation or set of situations. Once you've addressed the mystery or the danger, the story is over. However, if you have primary characters that the reader is emotionally attached to, invested in, this kind of ending can leave the reader feeling cheated.

For example, using the same climax ending from the previous post:

Mickey smirked as the last of his shots echoed and faded. Cautiously, he approached the figure sprawled face down in a muddy puddle rapidly turning red,. His smirk turned to a grin as he saw the gaping red holes in the black duster. The bastard was dead for sure.

Mickey kicked the corpse for good measure. "Prick," he said around his cigarette. "You should have killed me when you had the chance."

"True," he heard behind him. Mickey swung around in disbelief and hardly had time to register Lamont was alive behind him before the top of his head was blown away.

"Wrong prick," Lamont said, holstering his weapon. He walked away without a glance behind him for the dead.

If Lamont is the MC, killing Mickey may mean the end of Lamont's troubles. If the reader's involvement with Lamont is completely a part of this story, the reader might close the book happily, convinced that Lamont can take care of himself without worrying what might wait in his future. Depending on how much readers liked Lamont, they might be interested in future work where he figures in, but there's no urgency. As long as the key threats and threads of this story are tied with Mickey's death, the readers are cool.

But, what if Mickey is the MC, someone the readers followed through the whole book, thrilled for, worried for, stressed for. They're unlikely to be satisfied when he's blown away and left for dead. Readers are going to want an explanation (how did Lamont fool him?). They're going to want to know what will happen to Lamont (Will anyone make him pay? Will he be going after whoever Mickey might have been shielding/defending?) They're going to feel like the whole mess was a cheat. Why were they made to care about this guy just to blow him away? Which isn't to say you can't kill your MC, but that you'd better get the reader some resolution on why it happened, what made the story worthwhile anyway. The climax ending, in this case, won't work.

If a character, like Lamont, is the focus of the story, rather than the situation, with Lamont being multi-faceted and loaded down with history, relationships, and concerns beyond the risk from Mickey, this ending won't work either. If the readers are truly invested in Lamont, in him as a person, resolving the situation here may not be enough for them unless the writer has carefully cleaned up everything else that's key before. In general, the climax ending is for a book about a particular crisis where the crisis is the focus rather than characters or other relationships. It's very effective for a surprise ending, but it's risky if it's a surprise the reader is going to hate.

The case is similar for the denouement ending. Surprises are welcome, but you'd best not impinge on characters the reader is heavily invested in, which is one reason mysteries often use complex and intriguing characters to solve the mystery that are relatively outside the mystery itself. The characters who are involved might be likable or sympathetic, but the reader is generally not so invested that any answer is going to cause heartburn. Lord Peter Wimsey and his valet, Bunter, are fantastic characters, but readers all know Wimsey/Bunter, at least, didn't do it. Anyone else is fair game. The story arc is all about the mystery, this mystery, and its resolution, so that's why the denouement ending can work for those kinds of stories over and over again. Because the reader doesn't really have an investment with the victims affected by the mystery, with the implications, addressing the mystery itself is enough.

However, get a character the reader has a stake in involved - Sherlock Holmes' theoretical daughter ends up dead/implicated - and the author will need some extra time post mystery solution to address the impacts of those events on the characters the reader might care about.

And that's why climax/denouement endings are challenging to use for situations where the reader is meant to identify closely with a concerned character. Solving the crises/mystery isn't enough - the reader wants to understand the impacts to the people he cares about, needs to be reassured that the characters are in a stable state, have dealt with any tragedy they've faced personally, are ready to move on. So, the suitability of the ending is tied to whether the reader is tied to the situation or the characters with regards to the story.

So, what do you do for character driven stories or stories that involve something bigger than the specific crisis (for example, a book focused on a war campaign and its resolution, while the war continues before and after)?

Good question. I'll talk about some other ending types next time.

Endgame Part 1

2011-04-25T18:46:00.004-05:00

So you know what an ending is supposed to do, barest minimum: resolve things and bring the story arc to a close. But is that enough?

Not hardly. The ending, like the end game in chess, makes a hell of difference on the caliber of the game. Leaving the story arc unresolved may ruin the story, but making an ending that totally rocks can mean the difference between a "not-bad" book and "the best book ever!"

If it's the second kind you're shooting for, you'd best aim to do more than just resolve a few loose ends and write "THE END." Endings can have tremendous impact and power, can really reinforce the sense of the story, set a tone, add dessert to the meal of the book as it were and even set the stage for future work (or just a future for your characters). But that doesn't just happen. You have to make it happen. To do that, you have to know what you're trying to do with your ending.

For instance, in a high-tension thriller type novel, you might want to be keeping the reader guessing until the last minute taking the climax to the very end. Something like:

Mickey smirked as the last of his shots echoed and faded. Cautiously, he approached the figure sprawled face down in a muddy puddle rapidly turning red,. His smirk turned to a grin as he saw the gaping red holes in the black duster. The bastard was dead for sure.

Mickey kicked the corpse for good measure. "Prick," he said around his cigarette. "You should have killed me when you had the chance."

"True," he heard behind him. Mickey swung around in disbelief and hardly had time to register Lamont was alive behind him before the top of his head was blown away.

"Wrong prick," Lamont said, holstering his weapon. He walked away without a glance behind him for the dead.

This kind of ending is terrific for a short story, where you don't have much to clean up and the impact of the ending is enough to flavor the whole story. You can use it for a novel too as long as you've already resolved anything else that needs cleaning up. If not, don't use it. And, if you do use it, leave it as close to the climax as you can. Don't succumb to the temptation of going back and adding more. This kind of ending is most powerful if you end it like I did without extraneous winding down like describing him getting into this car and having some philosophical thoughts. You can end with philosophical thoughts, of course, but it's no longer a climax ending.

If you need a minimum of clean-up to your climax ending you can do the mystery staple, a denouement ending wherein the climax comes only a handful of pages from the end but is still centered on shock and awe, before explaining why it ended the way it did:

"In the end, the real murderer was his apparently innocent teenage daughter, frustrated beyond belief at the limited number of text message she was allowed on her cell phone. Driven to madness by being able to text only once every other minute, she killed her father by sliding her nail file into his ear so that the wound was hardly noticeable, especially after the car accident."

[Then explain, explain, explain, perhaps some tearful remorse by our teenager, now faced with the prospect of jail where she'll be stuck with a corded phone shared with twelve other inmates. Maybe our detective with smoke a well-earned pipe.]

The tighter and shorter you make the after explanations/winding down, the more impact it tends to have, so open questions and resolutions are often crammed in there willy nilly. Mysteries tend toward this model because you don't have to tie up loose ends as you go, it keeps tension up until nearly the very end and, well, it's easy. Let's face it, it's a formula that's been played until cliché. You can use it for non-mysteries, of course, but you need to be careful. Cleaning lots of stuff up neatly in a couple of pages often feels contrived and bewildering. It can be done, cleverly and so tidily that you impress the reader instead of bore them, but it takes a crisp conclusion that tidies itself to really make it shine. Otherwise, it tends to sound slipshod and clumsy.

More to come.

[Wow, a whole blog post without mentioning manga!]

Bringing it to a Close...Part 2

2011-04-20T16:20:00.003-05:00

When it comes to endings, it's important to appreciate what an ending is supposed to do. And not do.

Endings, in general, should pull the story arc together and bring it to a close. There are exceptions to this, of course - television shows left hanging, manga chapters with shocking revelations on the last page so that readers will be desperate to find out why and what the implications are in the next issue. It's a gimmick that's worked well for long-running serial works for ages.

But, in my opinion, that's not the kind of "ending" for a novel. Oh, it's been done and there are series of novels where several volumes are nothing more than a lead-in to the next. But, it's a copout, and a stupid gamble for any author that doesn't already have a huge and slavish following. A novel is a sizable investment in time and effort, not just on a writer's part, but on a reader's part. If a reader comes to the end of that investment and feels cheated, well, what are the chances they're going to invest in your next book? Maybe, if they're completely in love with your characters and story, but they are just as likely, if not more likely, never to pick up anything you've written again in case they get cheated again.

Oh, and for the record, even if you have a huge and slavish following as an author, shame on you if you play this "leave 'em hanging" game. Can't you keep your following without such gimmicks?

A novel, like a short story, should be able to stand on its own. It should have a complete story arc with beginning, middle, and ending that an unfamiliar reader should be able to absorb and enjoy without reading five novels before or having to read what follows. Everything required should be there. That doesn't mean there can't be allusion to characters and situations from before that would allow a fan who read the whole series to get something special. But the book should not require outside information pivotal to the story arc of this novel. This story has to stand on its own using only information provided inside the story or it's a cheat and a dirty trick to force more sales.

Not that I'm opinionated or anything.

Which leads me to my number one, my biggest and most essential ingredient to any ending: resolution. You've got to bring this story arc, novel or story, to a satisfactory close. Not necessarily a joyous one or a comfortable one. Happily ever after isn't required. Everyone doesn't have to fall in love and every loose end doesn't have to be neatly tied.

But the big ones do. The characters need to be in a stable condition (even if something else might be looming in the amorphous future). The crisis(es) that formed the focus(ii) of this story need to be resolved, even if it's not the ending the reader was hoping for. Ideally, relationships should be at an equilibrium (though, if that's just a sidelight instead of the focus of the story, that's less important). Key people need to have learned something, grown in some way.

As an author, you need to be aware of where your story's headed, whether you're a planner or a seat-of-the-pantser like me. Maybe not the specific ending for the story, but where you want your characters to be and what you want to accomplish with the story. The ending is your last chance to have your say and accomplish your goals, but you lay the groundwork for that ending from the very beginning, whether your ending is effectively polishing off a fulfilling entree or topping off a light meal with dessert.

You want to leave your reader feeling satisfied, you need an ending that makes the reader feel like all their time and effort was worth it. Which is the best possible advertisement for your next book. Or even an incentive to read that book again.

Bringing It to a Close...Part 1

2011-04-18T19:30:00.003-05:00

So. who did I scare?

I'm not talking about bringing this blog to a close, by the way, but wandering back to topic, i.e., writing. Not that I didn't think the talk on manga wasn't about writing, but it wasn't about novels per se and was focused on what both mangas and I tend to like best: characters.

In fact, I've spent an inordinate time speaking about characters, protagonists and villains and even side characters. But, as Relax Max pointed out (correctly) characters ain't enough. You're going to need a story. There's several pieces to the story: the premise, the plot, including climax and wind-down. How you introduce the story (and the characters) can make or break a novel/short story because many who might be interested in such things will stop reading quickly if the beginning doesn't grab their attention no matter how good your follow-through might be.

But, far too often I think, I find writers are lax with endings. Since I'm a backwards soul, I'm going to talk about that first. Partly because I'm contrary. Partly because I just had a distinct example.

[Spoilers here for Hana Kimi - if that's a manga you've been meaning to read and you don't want to know how it ends, stop here and come back after the "spoilers over" notice]

Pardon me for a moment as I temporarily allude back to manga. I recently read a series called Hana-Kimi, a long one (145 chapters, 23 volumes). Lovely characters, weak premise (as it frequently is), but amusing (not laugh out loud) and appealing. I wanted to know how they were going to pull it all together. I wanted to know what would happen to all these interesting people. I'm all geared to put this on my "must-have" list, put all the volumes on my wishlist for Amazon and then read the last handful of chapters.

Oh. Damn.

143 chapters of everyone working toward a single goal, allowing our heroine to stand side-by-side by her hero, no matter what. All of that was tossed away in chapter 144 for no discernible reason. True, our protagonists get "sort of" back together a year later (at least they're in the same country), but really, that was the only alternative? What was the point of the 143 chapters that came before? The dozens of friends and compatriots standing up for them? The many sacrifices made along the way? OK, it's a very Japanese ending, self-sacrifice in the face of support, but still. Everyone suffers. What were we all rooting for for so long?

And all the loose ends, those suffering from unrequited love or having the potential for all kinds of things (including winning national/international championships) left undone or unnoted. Even the MAIN characters are only promised to be promised three years after the original parting.

[End spoiler]

How frustrating!

Instead of me desperately trying to figure out how to justify buying 23 volumes of a manga when I've already bought so much, I'm quietly removing them from my wishlist. I no longer "have to have them" - now I'm not sure I want them at all.

Now, people can sell a lot of books that way, and not just manga. There are many series that have gone on forever, dragging on love stories or a plot arc over so many books that you wonder the author can remember what the characters look like. And, in all fairness, if you managed to capture an audience's interest for book after book without a real resolution, the temptation to continue to cash in on that notion has to be pretty high PLUS you could make an argument that, once you've gone to a certain length, no ending's going to be quite good enough to make your readers satisfied.

I suspect, in the case of some book series, some movie series and undoubtedly any number of manga, the end comes across as anti-climactic or unsatisfying because there's no ending good enough. Or worse, it comes to a close unexpectedly and they just don't have enough room to put it together properly.

But it can happen within in a single novel, too. Mickey Spillane said, "Nobody reads a mystery to get to the middle. They read it to get to the end. If it's a letdown, they won't buy anymore. The first page sells that book. The last page sells your next book." That's true of any book, in my opinion, not just mysteries.

A satisfying read means that, when you're done, you feel like things have been resolved sufficiently that the time you spent with these characters and in this story arc were well-spent. A bad ending can send even the best read into a tail-spin to crash and burn.

So, what do you need for a good ending? Good question. And one for the next post.

An Experiment

2011-03-31T15:09:00.003-05:00

So, Relax Max on Slap and Tickle suggested I write a story about a picture as he did. He was suggesting, I think, stealing a picture from my many favorite manga, but I know too much about the stories behind the pictures. It would corrupt me. So, in keeping with that, I'll just use the picture he used for his story, whatever it is. Instead of running a dime novel, though, I'll go for a stand alone story.

"My God, man! Do you know what you've got here?"

"Who the hell are you? And what were you saying to my sister? Marian! Marian! Was this creep bothering you? Damn it, you bastard! Why is she crying?"

"She's too sensitive, can't take the truth. Given the quality of her skin, the last thing she should be doing is crying. Really, honey, you'll look like a hag before forty if you don't do something about your skin."

"Bwaah! I'm going to find a teacher! You big meanie! Will you beat him up for me, Will?"

"If he doesn't get his hands off my face. What is your problem, asshole?"

"Your skin, on the other hand, is fabulous! So soft and your pores! Do you know what Britney Spears would give for your pores?"

"Let go, you freak. Let go my leg!"

"And your hair! I have a stylist friend, Lina, who would squeal with joy to run her fingers through your hair."

"You'll be squealing in something if you don't bloody well get your hands off my face and out of my hair. What's wrong with you?"

"My dear boy, I'm makeup artist to the stars. Your face couldn't be in better hands."

"Look here, nutcase, the only reason I haven't knocked you down the stairs is because I think that would actually kill you and I don't want to have to explain it. Let me go."

"So brutal. Really, so out of keeping with your beautiful skin and hair. You should be gentle, patient."

"Killing you is looking better and better."

"It's not a joke. What do you use on your face, your hair?"

"Soap."

"I'm serious. You have to take care of that skin. Do you want to end up looking like Brad Pitt?"

"Actually, that doesn't sound too bad as long as I'm not saddled with a dozen kids. You have five seconds to let me go before I start swinging."

"Believe me, handsome, you don't want his skin. Get within five feet and he looks like a troll. Hmm. You could use some mascara, though."

"That's it!"

[Punch, tumble, tumble, tumble.]

Apparently, the story I had in mind was all in dialog.

MangaMania Contest Concluded

2011-03-18T11:59:00.007-05:00

So, my first ever contest is over with at least five of my thirteen entries showing up before I officially announced the contest. So, here are the books again:

Rasetsu 1
Night of the Beasts 1
Kimi ni todoke 1
Otomen 1
Bride of the Water God 1
Vampire Knight 1
Fruits Basket 20

(Rating Loved, Liked, Didn't Like, Been Taken) Note that Rasetsu and particularly Night of the Beasts are both in used (but decent) condition thanks to my toddler. The rest are in pristine like new condition (since I only read them once or not at all if they're a duplicate). All except Fruits Basket are the first in the series. Remember, just because I didn't like them didn't mean they were bad.

Winners (in order of drawing):

Jeff King
Jeff King
Jeff King
Jeff King
Relax Max
The Mother
flit

Choosing which book(s) you want is a matter of whoever comes and asks first. Send me an email stephanieebarr at gmail dot com and let me know your preferences which include:

(a) which book(s) you want [or "surprise me"]
(b) your address/name if you want the book(s) OR you can say "send it to Jeff" since I think he was the only one trying to win OR you can say "Donate it to the library"

If you really want a particular book, email sooner rather than later because I will be choosing who gets what book based on who tells me first. First come, first serve. You might want to include alternates.

I will go to your blogs and let you know you all won. Thanks for those of you who bore with my Manga Mania. Believe it or not, it's still not out of my system. In fact, I seem obsessed with Dengeki Daisy, having read the entire series now three times in the past two weeks - and starting it again. Clearly, I'm wanting to get something specific out of it. I wonder what...

But I'll try to keep it out of the blog for a while.

Update: Jeff is taking Rasetsu, Night of the Beasts, Vampire Knight, and Kimi ni todoke. RM opted to send Otomen to Jeff, too. Flit's taking Bride of the Water God.

In Memorium

2011-03-14T17:34:00.004-05:00

Short of being underground the last few days, I don't see how anyone could not know of Japan's latest cataclysm. I don't watch the news. I was out all weekend. And I know about it.

Actually, though I would have spotted it when I checked NYT (as I do every weekday morning), my boss (who is also a geologist) brought it to my attention Friday morning. March 11 is my youngest daughter's birthday, a sister's birthday, yet for thousands if not millions of people, it will be a reminder of tragedy. As I looked at the first videos and pictures, I wept, knowing that, for untold numbers of regular people, their lives would be changed forever. I wept for the children that would never be found, the parents swept out to sea or buried in their homes, never to be seen again. I wept for the books that would never be written and songs that would never be recorded, for the ideas never brought forward by minds that are no more. I wept for the futures so many would never have . . . and for the futures altered by those losses. Mother Nature can be a ruthless bitch.

Admittedly, there are few places where she's been more brutal than Japan, a crusty edge of earth thrust up from the ocean and battered by everything Mother Nature has in her arsenal, from typhoon to tsunami to earthquake to volcano, not just now but since time immemorial.

Just to give a scope of this cataclysm, the primary earthquake that set this off, portions of Japan moved nearly four meters (13 feet) closer to the West. The earthquake released nearly twice as much surface energy as the horrific Sumatran earthquake that set off those horrible tsunamis in 2004. Not impressed yet? Try this. This earthquake has increased the speed of rotation of the earth and altered it's axis by 25 cm. That's right, our day is now 1.8 microseconds shorter because of this. From a physics standpoint, that just blows my mind.

I cannot yet grasp the scope of the effect on the people of Japan. I'm half a world away but I know people I know and have met through work, people I know who have gone and married into families there. There are people who have created things that mean something to me, devices I depend on, space hardware I admire, manga and anime I've been speaking so fervently about the past few weeks. People from Japan have changed my life, largely for the better, have touched and intrigued me.

If I'm affected, I imagine, there aren't many in Japan who aren't touched by this, changed by this, either from their own personal experiences or family and friends who have lost something or someone to this tragic event.

I grieve for you.

But, as harsh it sounds, I also have to say there are few people better suited to withstand this tragedy than the ever adaptive Japanese. Honed and battered by natural (and unnatural) adversity, up to and including to nuclear blasts, no people are more responsive, more resilient or more prepared. No society understands patience better or how to organize for the best. If they were less prepared, much of Tokyo would have toppled and fewer people would have escaped. Before the earthquake even happened, warnings were going out. Not soon enough for everyone, but there are undoubtedly lives that were saved.

I'm not making light of this horror. I've sent money to the Red Cross and I'll probably send more. This is more than any one nation should have to handle alone. Still. I have a profound respect for the Japanese culture, even if we don't always see eye to eye (Why, for instance, can't the princess take the Chrysanthemum throne?). I respect a society that learns, curbing their own imperialism and pugnaciousness, responding to Nagasaki and Hiroshima with Sony and Toyota. We can argue which ones were of the greatest impact in the long run.

I believe that Japan will come through this, even though it will be painful. I believe they will be stronger than before, as has always been their wont. I certainly hope they do.

All honor to those working even now among the devastated.

Mangamania: Ick

2011-03-13T17:49:00.001-05:00

Contest!

Physically and sexually aggressive scenes between romantic leads where every scene includes (but doesn't end with), "Please! Stop!"
Kissing a girl painfully and "uncontrollably" because he was pissed (at someone else)
Using rape of someone else's girlfriend as a revenge against that someone else
Having "romantic" rivals of a girl (who covet the boyfriend) set a girl up to be beaten and/or raped
Offering sexual favors to a man to get him to rape another girl for revenge (perhaps more disturbing given the one offering is also male)
Girls being kissed against their will explaining to their boyfriends that it was "their fault" for not being diligent enough - and having said boyfriends agree.
Extorting a girl into effective slavery and threatening to ruin her family is she doesn't obey. This slavery involves sexual aggression. (Note that these were the "romantic" leads)

I have to stop now. I'm getting a headache. And this is far from a comprehensive list. I need to add that these at least two of these titles are very successful. If you read out a fan's description of the story for Honey x Honey Drops in Wikipedia, perhaps you'll understand why I find these sorts of things so dangerous, as the fan who describes the story rationalizes away Renge's oppression. Ick.

I also have to say, I don't think it's a coincidence that the girls in these manga come across as abysmally stupid and weak. Or that my fondness for a manga is often inversely proportional to the character of the female protagonist. I'll include a brief premise but I don't think I'll need much to explain why these didn't work for me.

Kyou Koi wo Hajimemasu by Kanan Minami

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 10 Status: Ongoing

My rating: Ick

Premise: Old-fashioned girl is targeted by popular playboy for aggressive sexual teasing with the intent to drop her like a hot potato when she falls for him. Instead, she becomes fascinated with him and convinces him to come back to her, so she can be nearly raped by rivals and revenge-seekers, not to mention our "protagonist" repeatedly. She is pressured by friends to throw away her virginity or risk losing her boyfriend. Do I have to explain why I hate this?

Honey x Honey Drops by Kanan Minami

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 8 Status: Complete

My rating: Ick

Premise: High school is forcibly made the servant of a rich student who sexually and physically harasses and uses her (but is presumably her romantic lead). In return, her tuition is paid. If she quits, she's expelled. Ah, young love. Again, if I don't see why I would have to explain why I hate this.

Ai wo Utau Yori Oreni Oborero by Mayu Shinjo

Anime? No Volumes of manga: ? Status: Complete

My rating: Ick

Premise: A feminine-looking boy, "princess" of his all boy school, joins a girl band where he aggressively pursues the tall masculine-looking lead guitarist (the "prince" of her all-girl school). Both are additionally pursued by members of their own school sexually. The prince not only uses the admiration of the boys in his school to manipulate them to do whatever he wants, he is also somewhat brutally pursuing the innocent and ineffectual female lead who is apparently weak as a daisy. (I'm fine with role reversals, but girly-looking sexual predator is not less creepy than a masculine-looking one. Seriously.).

MangaMania: Those I Didn't Like

2011-03-12T17:00:00.003-06:00

Contest!

First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

Well, I've moved down the list from things I loved and have reread repeatedly, to those that appealed to me (even if I didn't understand why) to those that turned out to be less than I'd hoped. Now, we're on to those items I just didn't like. Not, burn them in the fireplace dislike, just have no interest in reading really past the first book. Note that my interest (or lack of it) has nothing to do with a books popularity. Kimi ni todoke (From Me to You), for instance, has won prestigious manga awards and is very successful. I just don't like it.

Kimi ni Todoke (From Me To You) by Karuho Shiina

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 13 (7 Eng) Status: Ongoing

My rating: Didn't like it.
Age: Teenager is fine. Kinda squeaky.

Premise: Painfully shy girl looks like someone scary from a movie and is treated like a pariah. When a popular boy makes friends with her, more people start to warm up to her and find out she's really a nice person.

Why I Didn't Like It: She's too nice. No matter what horrible thing is done to her, she looks for the kindness in it (and yet is suspicious at the other times inexplicably). She shows no obvious sign of smarts, but it scholarly successful and an excellent teacher. (I found there's a distinct trend between how smart the female protagonist is and how much I liked the manga). Still, I could see this appealing to someone who knew what it was like to be painfully shy--I'm not and never have been. However, the pacing on this story is so horribly slow it was frustrating. And there's no conflict in this manga besides our heroine overcoming her shyness and the ridiculously stilted romance. That's thirteen volumes and counting, folks. The manga spent like four chapters with our romantic leads "confessing" their feelings with neither of them recognizing what the other was saying and both feeling rejected. Four chapters. I just don't have enough free time to put up with that. The artwork is also just not my style.

Night of the Beasts by Chika Shiomi

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 6
Status: Ongoing?

My rating: Didn't like it. Age: Older teen for violence.

Premise: High school badass girl can take out guys hustling girls, but isn't prepared for the demon possessed that are now wandering the streets, including the strange guy, also possessed, who can only be calmed in a rampage with her touch.

Why I Didn't Like It: It sounds like the kind of premise I'd like, seriously. 'Cept I didn't. The artwork is okay, too. So, why didn't I like it? I can't actually put my finger on it except I couldn't have cared less about either character and had no interest, whatsoever, in reading more. In fact, I tried to read it again today and stopped halfway, unwilling to invest another twenty minutes. Which just goes to show that, like a novel, a good idea isn't enough. I couldn't dredge up interest in either character (neither of which seemed to act in ways that made sense to me) and no humor that appealed to me, I was left bored.

Otomen by Aya Kanno

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 12 (9 Eng) Status: Ongoing

My rating: Didn't like it. Age: Teenager - it's squeaky clean.

Premise: Manly highschooler, who excels in martial arts, also loves to cook and sew and do many girly things. He keeps this part of him hidden until he falls for a girl.

Why I Didn't Like It: I wanted to like this. There was comic potential. I like twisting traditional roles. There's a side character who almost appeals. The premise appeals. The artwork's not bad. Our leading man even is quite attractive. Unfortunately, he had all the charm of the terminator in the first Terminator movie. No charm, no depth, no humor. He's as cleancut as Superman without the twinkle in his eye, more like Superman in a frilly apron prone to moralizing. If the girl in question had been loaded with personality, I might have pushed past it, but, sadly, she was like a standard "school friend" side character, not a romantic lead. I tried to like it. I failed.

Rasetsu by Chika Shiomi

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 8
Status: Complete

My rating: Didn't like it. Age: Older teen, probably for violence and sexual innuendo.

Premise: Youthful hypoglocemic performs exorcisms using her spiritual skills while knowing she is doomed to become demon-fodder if she doesn't fall in love (and get loved in return) by eighteen. But no one wants her, I can't even remember why. Someone else is dragged into the ghost-busting business almost involuntarily who, I presume, is the proposed love interest.

Why I Didn't Like It: I literally could cut and paste the reason for Night of the Beasts (by the same author) in here. In fact, I will: It sounds like the kind of premise I'd like. The artwork is nice, too. So, why didn't I like it? I can't actually put my finger on it except I couldn't have cared less about either character and had no interest, whatsoever, in reading more. Which just goes to show that, like a novel, a good idea isn't enough. I couldn't dredge up interest in either character (neither of which seemed to act in ways that made sense to me) and no humor that appealed to me, I was left bored.

Manga Mania: Just Okay

2011-03-11T17:27:00.004-06:00

Contest!

First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

So, having finished off my "current" list of mangas that "have a certain appeal" to me, we move down to the list to mangas that were just "okay," in other words, mangas I read through but walked away feeling disappointed without a compelling urge to read them again.

Flowers in a Storm by Shigeyoshi Takagi

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 2
Status: Complete

My rating: Okay

Age range/taboos: Sexual innuendo, some violence, most of it silly. It's probably safe for a teenager who is most likely to be more tolerant of this level of nonsense than I am.

Premise: Our heroine is a high school student with extraordinary physical abilities who tries to pretend she's normal because she thinks her differences preclude her getting a boyfriend. Ironically, she attracts the interest of someone foolishly rich who becomes determined to marry her, using any means necessary and proud as hell of her physical capabilities.

Why It's Just Okay: This could have been very funny, despite the basic stupidity of the notion. Or one of the characters could have been appealing in some way. Instead, our rich suitor is mostly a flaky moron who makes no sense and the heroine's incentive to resist the flaky moron (since she's not exactly a rocket scientist herself) seems weak from the get go. She wants a boyfriend and romance, seems protective of the one guy who is clearly comfortable with her weirdnesses. Since she's not thrown really by his weirdnesses, I don't get the conflict. I read the first one thinking it was stupid but had a couple cute moments. Rereading it when I had the second one changed my mind. My stupid meter was pegged. Also, the artwork didn't appeal to me.

Tail of the Moon by Rinko Ueda

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 15
Status: Complete

My rating: Okay

Age range/taboos: Nudity (but not detailed nudity), near rape, plenty of sexual references, plenty of violence. I think it's rated for older teens. That's probably right, though much of it has a cutesy look and feel.

Premise: Set in the Tensho Era of Japan, Usagi is a failure at becoming a ninja largely because she's lazy. As a last ditch effort, she's sent to a neighboring ninja village to marry the highly competent but uninterested Hanzo. His village is desperate for him to find a bride, but he won't wed anyone and, even when Usagi somehow worms her way into his heart, won't marry her until she becomes a real ninja.

Why It Was Just Okay: Okay, it's a period of history that interests me and there are real events covered in this. And shinobi lore is an interest of mine. There's definitely some good humor in this and some nice moments. However, the things that were wrong were painful in the extreme (noisiest ninjas ever, for instance). Usagi has the mentality of a nine-year-old, even if she has a developed body and looks like a black-haired cherub. The artwork is fine, with particularly the male characters being ridiculously good-looking. They were also, without exception, attracted to Usagi which I just didn't get. Hanzo's focus on appearances is whacked, but not as whacked as Usagi's nominal foolishness which manages to screw up nearly everything she's involved in. But it's all good because she can make a medicine that will cure anything, from nerve damage to blindness with any handy herbs. (The Mother should not read this.) Usagi's immaturity, more than her nominal age, make this seem somewhat creepy. Yes, she's a brave kid who works hard when she has to, but the inexhaustible ingenue-ness wore me down.

Wild Ones (aka Arakure) by Kiyo Fujiwara

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 10
Status: Complete

My rating: Okay

Age range/taboos: Cross dressing, some very minimal sexual innuendo. More threat of violence than actual violence. Really, it's pretty safe for teenagers, too, the title notwithstanding.

Premise: Orphan (Sachie) is adopted by her grandfather who happens to be the head of a yakuza organization (gangsters) who are effectively harmless. A teenager just a year older is assigned as her bodyguard/caretaker, whose job is complicated by his love for her and her reckless disregard for anything resembling judgement.

Why It Was Just Okay: There's some comic potential in a group of shy good-hearted yakuza (so common in reality) taking care of a single teenaged girl no matter what wrong-headed thing she decides to do. There is something actually charming about the bodyguard's devotion to her. She's certainly good-natured, just heedless. Problem is, this notion would have worked for a few books at most, not dragged out to ten with the two leads (obviously in love in first few chapters) still not understanding the situation in volume 8. Oy! Ten volume romance with one kiss. Pacing was a problem and the same old tired unnecessary adventures started to get old long before I reached the end of them. You'd think Sachie would learn something over time. The artwork was okay, somewhat standard, but there was something freaky about the mirror-like eyes everyone had. The end was both frustrating and lame, in my opinion.

MangaMania: Special A/Vampire Game

2011-03-10T17:57:00.002-06:00

Contest!

First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

Special A by Minami Maki

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 17
Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Some cross-dressing. Pervasive but non-lethal violence. Pretty safe for teens in my opinion.

Premise: Hikari, the commoner, is rivals with Takashima Kei who is rich, mind-bogglingly brilliant and exceptionally athletic. She isn't the same kind of natural but manages to come up second place through absolute willpower and hard work. Consumed with finally beating him, she's oblivious to the fact he's been desperately in love with her since they were kids. Special A refers to a special class for the most exceptional students in a high end private high school, which is where our protagonists are.

What works: Aside from the ridiculous exaggerations in wealth and abilities, Takashima Kei has my complete sympathy. Having everything easy just means the expectations are ridiculous and the only thing in the world that gives him joy is his interaction with the enthusiastic and well-meaning Hikari. Rather than feeling superior, he's absolutely in awe of her hard work and what she accomplishes without his natural gifts. Since she completely doesn't see romance on the horizon, Kei needs the patience of a saint as he works around her endless misunderstandings and awkward attempts to embrace her feelings.

Hikari is completely innocent, honorable and trusting. She is also quite capable of kicking serious butt, which is always charming in a manga female. It's even pretty easy to see why she's so important to Kei, who would work himself to death if it weren't for her involvement. If she wasn't so unbelievably clueless, she might be quite likable. It is also, quite frequently very humorous, mostly because the richy-rich scenarios and plot-lines are so desperately absurd.

Note: The anime has a certain charm, but it's dubbed (at least what I saw) and sometimes the Japanese originals are a bit grating. But I liked it anyway and watched the whole thing.

What I didn't like: Unfortunately, Hikari is dumb as a post, no matter how well she powers through tests. I admire Kei's patience because she frustrates the ever living hell out of me. The other members of Special A are, in my opinion, relatively hollow characters despite the stories the author's tried to weave around them. The absurdity is frequently humorous, but sometimes it's as wearying as Hikari's immature idiocy.

The artwork doesn't impress me much. I don't find it particularly compelling or polished.

Vampire Game

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 15 Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Some sexual (including homosexual) innuendo and violence. Some pretty benign sort of nudity. Cross dressing, too. Still, it's all pretty harmless. I wouldn't be worried if I had a teenager read it.

Premise: Vampire killed in mortal combat with a great hero is reincarnated as a cat set on killing the hero in his reincarnated mode. Instead, he gets mixed up in the convoluted shenanigans surrounding, Ishtar the young and headstrong princess (and descendant of the original hero) and her many suitors.

What works: It's hard not to like both the reincarnated vampire and Ishtar. Although she starts out looking sort of like a care-for-nobody, one soon sees past that and, although the adventures spawned are (surprise!) absurd, they are original and creative. Darres, who Ishtar loves, is somewhat oblivious, but he is devoted and capable (mostly). If wrong-headed and heedless, Ishtar is somewhat capable as well, which is nice. The vampire (whose powers increase and include shapeshifting) is amazingly useful and grows to be very appealing.

There are a host of side characters that end up being quite compelling with little fanfare. I think part of that is that the artwork is appealing and pretty consistent. My daughter loves this one more than I do, but I have to say it was a fun read. And, sometimes, that's all you need.
What I didn't like: I wish Darres wasn't quite so clueless. I would have liked him to be a bit more involved in Ishtar's obvious romance.

MangaMania: Millenium Snow/Phantom Dream

2011-03-09T17:51:00.001-06:00

Contest!
First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

Millenium Snow

Millenium Snow, a two volume manga written by Bisco Hatori (of OHSHC fame).

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 2 Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Mostly your normal blood-drinking taboos inherent to anything involving vampires. Really, nothing else comes to mind. I can't see a teenager taking harm from reading this.

Premise: Our heroine, Chiyuki, whose full name means "thousand snows" has a medical condition that has largely kept her in the hospital her whole life and is expected to kill her soon, if not any moment. She sees someone leap from a roof and leaves her hospital bed to find Toya, a vampire with the power to keep a human alive for a thousand years but no inclination to do so or live that long himself. He won't drink blood and so lives on excessive amounts of food instead.

What works: The premise largely works because she wants to live and he, he really has no interest in living. It is his belief that drinking her blood (lifelong) to prolong her life (and apparently it's a step that cannot be undone) would make her miserable and that she would blame him for living too damn long. Apparently, finding a single companion is standard practice for vampires, which works symbiotically for both and precludes that standard blood-drinking rampages. I think that's kind of clever and, at least, a little off the beaten track. It's just twisted enough to appeal.

I actually like both characters even if they are somewhat stiltingly portrayed and Toya spends the first half of the first book largely unlikeable. Toya's minion, the bat, however is quite likeable and the largely selfless and life-loving Chiyuki is appealing. I like that he ends up prolonging her life (and curing her) with a little of his own blood. There is some worthwhile humor as well, though the characters are often quite dense as well. Chiyuki is probably the most appealing of the protagonists because she knows what she wants and she's perfectly patient about getting it. Personality-wise, she's the strongest, which is a nice change. I like that he worries that he loves her too much to be trusted to stay with her.

What I didn't like: I don't like the artwork at all. It's busy, confusing and the characters are drawn in a very unappealing way, despite the descriptions of being "handsome" and the like. Too much shouting going on and the wedge between the two, Toya's reluctance to solve both their problems at once, seems contrived and lasts too long. But the biggest thing I disliked was that the author obviously intended to carry it further and was stopped so it ends feeling very unfinished with no resolution. Irritating in the extreme to me.

Phantom Dream by Natsuki Takaya (who did Fruits Basket)

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 5 Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Nudity, teenage sex (though implied more than shown), violence. Older teen is probably most appropriate.

Premise: Summoner who protects humankind from demons intent on turning the world to chaos and eradicating humankind (heavy, I know) is in love with a "normal" girl who turns out to be pivotal to the whole thing.

What works: I've mentioned that mythological stuff appeals to me so this does too. This is also some of my favorite artwork by Takaya which isn't as emotionally impactful as Fruits Basket but is more elaborate and expansive than Tsubasa.

In this case, although I like the main male protagonist well enough, it's the girl I like best, Asahi, who is considered too normal to be a real bride. Her devotion and self-sacrifice for Tamaki is compelling and absolute. That there's more than meets the eye adds something to it all. It's interesting and has dark elements that many manga don't have. I like that. It had a satisfying ending.

What I didn't like: I don't really get Tamaki so much. He doesn't seem terribly bright. Much of the mystique and notions behind the fight between good and bad is confusing and we spend a long time wondering what side Asahi is on. Some of the translation seems stilted and the motivations are confusing.

MangaMania: Bride of the Water God/Butterflies, Flowers

2011-03-08T17:22:00.005-06:00

Contest!
First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

Bride of the Water God

Bride of the Water God is technically a manwha from Korea, written by Yun Mi-kyung. It's also unique in all these series I describe in that it reads front to back and left to right like a "normal" comic.

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 11 (7 Eng) Status: Ongoing

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Some limited sexual innuendo and violence, though more the description of violence than actual. Again, I don't see teenagers coming to grief reading this, though I'm not sure how much it would appeal to them either (though my daughter likes it).

Premise: Based on myths about the water god Habaek, it largely follows the intrigue of the gods' realm with everyone wanting to control Habaek who is hung up, first on his memories of his lost human bride (Nakbin) and then on his new human bride Soah (sacrificed by the village to end a drought). Soah is who we follow. Soah is confused since Habaek is cursed to be a child during during the day and a man by night since the man (who "isn't" Habaek) romances her.

What works: Of all the manga-ish books I have, this is the series where artwork was the biggest driver. It's beautiful, detailed, powerful, filled with decorative intricacies and convoluted costumes. I'm not lying when I say it's stunning and the colored cover art is gorgeous, too.

I also like mythology and like learning more about it, so it's somewhat interesting to me from that point. I have some fondness for Mui, even if I don't understand his motivations frequently, I understand those moments when he is trying to be protective, even if it comes across more like callous given that his interest in Soah makes her attractive as a pawn in the gods' power struggle.

What I didn't like: It's frustrating to me that Soah doesn't get most of what's going on. She seems to have a very limited understanding. Pretty, clearly attached to Habaek (in both forms) and jealous of the many Nakbin spinoffs that show up, but still largely clueless and easily used. She's not particularly strong.

Also the story is confusing, partially because of the large pantheon of characters I, personally, have a hard time keeping up with (especially the Emporer and his tendency for disguise), partially because many characters have multiple names, and partially because I find the story itself hard to follow. My lack of understanding of the actual myths behind the story probably don't help much. It also seems to drag on a bit so pacing's slow, possibly because the artist behind this takes up so many pages with dramatic art. So it's not all bad.

Butterflies, Flowers

Talk about a contrast to Bride of the Water God, Butterflies, Flowers is a mature-rated manga written by Yuki Yoshihara, with adults in a "office" setting and a great deal of melodrama.

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 8 (6 Eng) Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: It's rated mature which might be a misnomer, not because I recommend it for teenagers (I don't) but because it's not exactly designed to appeal to the mature. Adults only, but it's more fraternity-type maturity. There are few sexual taboos that aren't crossed here, with plenty of innuendo, nudity and sex, some measure of violence. Cross-dressing is included.

Premise: Working girl whose wealthy family has fallen on hard times find she's working for a man who was once her special servant growing up. His adoration of her as a child becomes something more adult but not without confounding them both. He's also very very weird.

What works: I'm struggling a bit with this one. The characters, for once, are not the draw. I don't really like either one, though I like Suwo a bit. In fact, a number of side characters are a good bit of fun. Perhaps I like the fact that nothing is sacred, that a good bit of this is making fun of the manga excesses only a good bit more crudely than OHSHC did. Domoto, our male lead, is one of the most melodramatic characters ever, possibly schizophrenic. He is both calm and cool and hot-tempered, a sexual harasser of the highest order and abjectly correct in preserving his girlfriend's virtue, emotionally emotive to the nth degree (he cries frequently). The action and plotlines are consistently absurd.

And that, boys and girls, might be why I've read this raunchy silly thing more than once, why it still makes me laugh. You can't take the damn thing too seriously and it's so stupid it's funny. True, that can backfire and I know a number of things that peg out my stupid meter so that my laughter reflex is squashed. Apparently this just wiggles under that for me. When we go off on "otaku" tangents (otaku means fans of manga/anime/video games) where our characters can drive a mechanized suit a la gundam, it's ridiculous. And, I guess, that it's charm.

What I didn't like: Well, it's stupid. The characters aren't particularly likeable or do anything that makes a lick of sense. The artwork is not good, in my opinion, nor our main players good looking.

Some of the sexual harassment, sexual aggression, etc. is off-putting. I find that's true of most sophomoric romps like this, though. One could argue a serious level of misogyny here, but I don't think that's entirely accurate. The girl is often in charge of the situation and still, largely, calls the shots. And Domoto swings from workplace aggressor to happy housewife.

MangaMania: Backstage Prince/Beast Master

2011-03-07T16:02:00.004-06:00

Contest!
First, something I never ever do, I'm going to do. That's right, a contest! And it's a retroactive contest. See, during my manga mania, I picked up several books that I either already had or turned out didn't work out for me, including several first in a series: Otomen, Kimi ni todoke, Ratsetsu, Bride of the Water God, and Vampire Knight. I also have volume 20 (don't ask me why) of Fruits Basket over and above the whole set and volume 1 of Night of the Beasts, which I let my manga-obsessed toddler play with so I can't vouch for the condition. I figured I'd make a drawing of all those who took the effort to make a comment throughout the whole manga mania series (including those to come) and draw names out of the hat for each commenter. Then they get to pick which book they want (first come, first serve) and I'll send it to them. Five books, five winners (6-7 winners if anyone wants to take a chance on the state of Night of the Beasts or wants Vol 20 of FB). I'll include anyone who's already commented, though you can bow out if you'd like. Most are in good enough condition for regifting if you want to do that. If no one's interested, hey, I'll donate them to the local library.

Alright, moving on to series I liked but don't necessarily get down and reread over and over and over and over again. Ones that appealed to me for some reason or another, enough that I own all of them, too (or am getting all of them), but can't necessarily overlook their flaws. They often have either partially developed characters or only one character I really like. Four of them are earlier works by mangaku (manga authors) whose later works made my "gotta have 'em all" list.

Backstage Prince

First, here's Backstage Prince, a two volume to completion manga written by Kanako Sakurakoji (who also wrote Black Bird), in which we see the author favors a particular look for her protagonists, quite similar to those in Black Bird. We also discover that she's in love with a kabuki actor. Wikipedia has a really interesting article on Kubuki for those interested. But I digress.

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 2
Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: I don't see an issue with any teenager reading this. No nudity, minimal lewdness. Cross-dressing is limited to the actual Kabuki.

Premise: "Normal" high school student, Akari, signs up to assist a talented up and coming kabuki actor after she accidentally hurts him. Although handsome and talented, the actor is a misanthrope and generally hates people, but she (and his cat) become exceptions to the world he mostly scorns. Her influence and support enable him to largely overcome his bad attitude sufficiently that it doesn't undermine his success.

What works: The cat is charming. I actually like our misanthrope who doesn't hate people so much as he is somewhat painfully shy and has been unwillingly in the spotlight since birth. He's been under the control of others entirely and his relationship with Akari is one of the first things he takes a stand on. He's not a people person and he, as a person, is unable or unwilling to compete with the image others have of him. Akari, who cares nothing about his image and sees him for himself, is the first person he sees as seeing him as he is. His ego is confined to his kabuki skills which are, apparently, prodigious.

His whole-hearted and unwavering devotion to the two things he cares about: the cat and Akari, is touching and sweet, even if he's not the best at expressing it. So, yeah, I liked him, even though we only saw him through Akari's eyes. I also liked their relationship, how she brought out the best in him just by being there.

To be honest, I thought the insight into Kabuki was also interesting, since I knew nothing about it. Cool beans. It's also a nice short read, but ending tidily.

What I didn't like: The characters aren't entirely fleshed out and it's a bit heavy on the teenage angst, given the assistant is a teenager. She's supportive but really doesn't do much of anything. She's sort of reactive, so she's not as strong as I would have liked. Still, she ends up as stalwart as her two-years senior boyfriend. The artwork is not particularly refined or notable.

Beast Master

I know, right? Some of the names . . . oh well, part of it is likely translation. Beast Master is another earlier work by a mangaku I like, this time Kyousuke Motomi (author of Dengeki Daisy). I might have actually bumped this into gotta have 'em all except I just finished writing those up when I read this one. It's still too new for me to be objective. So, be warned, it might move up the ladder (or conceivably, down).

Anime? No Volumes of manga: 2
Status: Complete

My rating: Has a certain appeal

Age range/taboos: Our hero here, spent much of his life "in the wild" and will go on a violent berserk rampage if put at risk and/or bloodied (or, apparently, if his girlfriend is). So, yeah, bloody violence happens but no corpses except for a leopard. Still, I don't think many teenagers would be adversely affected by this.

Premise: Girl who loves animals but sends them running with her smothery ways befriends a boy who comes off as scary while being exceptionally good with animals. Turns out, he's lived in the wild most of his life. She discovers quickly that he will go berserk to protect himself, but that she can get him to calm down when no one else can.

What works: Both protagonists are appealing, "Leo" (the "wild boy") is unaffected and unstintingly affectionate with his own backward charm that I like. She is selfless and strong, without being overpowering or nasty. If she's a little slow to catch on to Leo's devotion to her, that's hardly anything new in manga. I like that she refuses to treat him like an animal and that both of them are focused on the well-being of the other. This manga could have been longer and still appealing, but it shortness kept it from bogging down, so that's nice, too. Tidy.

I like the emphasis on animals (the girl's father is a veterinarian) and find Leo's gentleness (when not in berserk mode) completely in character. I like his unfamiliarity with modern technology and processed foods fun, too. The artwork, like Backstage Prince was, is less refined than the author's later works, but still capable of being quite moving. This is more dramatic and emotionally pulling than Backstage Prince. I also have to admit I liked both of the short mini-manga stories included with the books.

What I didn't like: Side characters pretty much sucked (except for Banchou, the friendly neighborhood thug). Either they were shallow and uninteresting, or too wacked to take seriously. The back story behind Leo's unconventional upbringing was also pretty weak, even by manga standards. Fortunately, it wasn't really key except toward the end.

MangaMania Observations 2

2011-03-06T22:44:00.001-06:00

Last time, I talked about observations and trends I saw in artwork, idiosyncrasies and stylistic choices that might throw off a new reader but also, in my opinion, could enhance humor and add creative depth.

But there are either cultural or other idiosyncrasies that might be difficult for many of us US folks to work around. Some obviously stem from cultural differences between Japan and here (which is far less repressed in some ways and more repressed in others). Some stem from the differences in the way education is run, the emphasis on education and even the relative lack of widespread crime in Japan. For instance, apparently Japanese school children routinely make their way to their schools alone, taking trains or buses as required without fanfare. I would presume you could do the same thing in European cities where mass transit is pervasive and crime is a much lower level than it is here, where here is seems callous or dangerous. Also, apparently, children pay tuition for (at least) high school with tuition varying widely and, sometimes, scholarships offered to excellent students.

Some have to do with how characters are portrayed and what, in Japanese culture, is most admired. Given that I haven't lived in Japan, I have to speculate what are aspects particularly to manga (as opposed to Japanese life) and what are reflections on actuality. Still here are some trends I've noticed in the manga with no intimated assertion on how it is in reality.

Student council is a much bigger deal in Shojo high schools than it ever was in my high school, with student councils expected to help police the school and support clubs and activities. Regular students are supposed to help clean up classrooms and take out recycling, etc. as well. High schools are three year institutions. Taking exams to get into university is a huge deal and is the focal point for anyone wanting to move forward academically.
Being academically advanced has considerable cache, with popularity often going with it, particularly for male characters (not sure why it's different for women, but, hell, here in the US being bright isn't really popular for either gender so it could be worse). Those that also excel in sports have to just about beat off women with sticks. As always, being rich doesn't hurt either, but smart still wins. Girls are rarely at the top academically and, if girls are struggling with one or more subjects, it's likely math and/or English.
Fever is the ultimate default illness. Skull fracture, separated shoulder - you'll recover readily. You aren't really incapacitated until you get a fever, but a fever alone (whether brought on by an aggravated cold or stress or overwork or exhaustion) will cause collapse and can only really be treated with bedrest (often just overnight).
Girls are expected to be more romantically aggressive, with Valentines all about giving boys you admire chocolate and girls unlikely to receive any but friendship chocolate from other female friends. In shojo manga, girls are frequently confessing their feelings to boys who may or may not have paid them the slightest attention (though, for some reason, it is a rarity for a central female protagonist to do so). Girl fandom, as noted in these manga, is almost frightening, with popular boys seen as nearly rock stars.
Costume play (cosplay) seems to be quite popular with little or no stigma attached to cross-dressing, especially for guys. This openmindedness often is extended outward to homosexuality as well, with for some reason male homosexuality being generally accepted with perhaps more ease (if not titillation particularly among girls) than lesbianism. Not sure I entirely get that.
Girls are not restricted to typical girl roles/professions; nor are men. In half of the manga I've read, girls are excellent cooks, for instance, while in the other half either they've been pampered and never learned or they are inherently unable to cook no matter how hard they try (including the potential for explosions). In the latter cases, where girls can't cook, the men invariably are quite adept at cooking if not exceptionally gifted chefs. I guess there's something to be said that a lasting relationship requires that at least one of the members can cook. It is endearing that men attracted to even the worst cooks will still willingly eat what's cooked for them. Gitls in these manga strive to be everything from restaurateurs to teachers to lawyers to what have you. Boys also seem to be willing to pursue teaching and nursing careers rather than just glamorous or flashy professions.
Physical aggression is portrayed quite differently, with physical attacks being quite frequent (and even friendly), particularly between boys, between girls and from girls to boys (not, except for bad guys, generally from males toward girls). Girls, in shojo manga, are frequently physically capable and aggressive, generally well able to defend themselves. This capability does not, however, preclude their love interests from rushing to their defense or otherwise trying to protect them with or without their permission. Some girls take that better than others. Some will do the same right back, often to the boy's consternation. Girls unable to do their own defending will often have other skills that still enable them to hold their own (like Misao's ability to heal demons and her willingness to use venom).
The moral high ground is more likely to be the girl's thing. Girls are routinely jumping into danger in the interest of protecting others or standing up for some principle or the other, whereas the males are more likely just to jump in if someone specific they care about is involved. The vast majority of shojo manga girls are intrepid, sometimes even frighteningly so, even if they get panicked when things spiral away. Still, they almost all have their moments where they are doing the rescuing.
Kissing is a bigger deal than it is here, I think. High school students can be in relationships for months without kissing apparently. Kissing is generally described something you only do with someone you love (which is apparently not necessarily true with sex). And that goes to something else that is almost always true: even the most passionate male protagonist backs off and takes his cues from the girl. That includes stepping aside gracefully if the girl chooses someone else (as happens in a number of the love triangles). It is undoubtedly one reason I like these mangas.
Shojo manga romance is almost always the kind of romance I like, where the interests and happiness of who you love takes precedence over oneself, including one's own passion. I wish western romance would embrace that kind of thinking again.

Well, that was fun. I'm sure I missed some but, hey, you get the idea.

MangaMania Observations 1

2011-03-03T18:19:00.006-06:00

Well, an interesting experiment. Somehow, talking about manga seems to have driven off my few remaining readers. Odd. Well, that's hardly surprising. Ever since I was young, I devoured books, good and bad, picking them apart so I understood why I liked them, what moved me, what left me cold so I could emulate the one and avoid the other.

Truthfully, I was as surprised as you all appear to be that I have so thoroughly enjoyed manga, since I think I had a rather dismissive attitude in the beginning. Please, comic books? Ah, but now I'm so grateful I really tried to accept and understand. If I hadn't, I would have missed out on a whole new world of experiences, clarifications and variations on character types I love, a sizable amount of laughter. And, if it's bothered you all that I've "wasted my time" waxing on and on about manga, it hasn't been a waste to me. Expressing what I loved and even didn't love helped me understand it better, just like analyzing a novel. And I've enjoyed reliving piences of the manga.

So–insert groans here–I'll be doing more of the same, this time describing manga that didn't make my top rating and even, eventually, those I actively disliked and why. Before I do, however, I'd like to go over a few observations from manga that I thought were interesting and perhaps even challenging for someone unfamiliar with the world of manga.

Mechanics and appearance:

First, a large percentage of Japanese origin manga read differently than we US folks are used to. They read "back to front", generally right to left and top to bottom. I say generally because manga don't always keep their drawings in tidy rectangular boxes and almost never in uniform sizes. Angled, even curved areas, whole page and even two page presentations, tiny boxes focusing on a small aspect of a bigger picture might be superimposed on another panel. Thoughts and discussion also might go from one box to the other, making following the "action" and thought/dialogues can take a bit of practice. The inconvenience of learning a new way to read "comics" is more than made up for in the creativity that results, where the shape and configuration of the drawings enhance the impact of the drawings. Way cool.

Secondly, the caliber and style of drawings vary widely, not only manga to manga, but within a manga. Lush detailed drawings with textures and shading and elaborate costumes and backdrops might be juxtaposed to line drawings to show emotion next to simplified drawings (even stick figures) that emphasize mood, attitude or position. Some use many gradations between these levels, like Minami (Special A). This also can take some getting used to. Some authors, Hino (Vampire Knight) have very limited reliance on the simplified drawings but do considerable work with the line vs detailed drawings. Manhwa artist Mi-kyung (Bride of the Water God) tends to keep everything at a high level. Hatori (Ouran High School Host Club) runs the full gamut, often mixing the stylized/simplified with the detailed almost willy nilly, including stick figures. Some mangaku make the absolute most of their simplified drawings, making them the punchline or adding visual hilarity with manga exaggerations for a slapstick element.

Manga tends to incorporate a great many exaggerated mannerisms. Olympic level weeping, excessive shock, rage, befuddlement, embarrassment and even violence (and reaction to violence, such as overblown bumps on the head) abound. This symbol, ╬, for instance, is frequently used to indicate irritation, even rage (like a vein throbbing). Bigger and bolder (or more of them) indicate the level. Blushing/fever might be full faced and physically sizzling. Tears can leap out from the face, flow in unending rivulets down the face or even form pools of water. A new reader, unused to such stylistic eccentricities, could readily be confounded by them, but, with patience, one can see that they only serve to communicate something simply and easily without slowing things down. They can also be hilarious.

Dialog can be confusing, with different shapes for shouting (pointing) or happy things (cloudlike) mixed with thoughts and internal dialogue and talk bubbles, often ambiguously attributed, especially if the conversation involves a large group (as happens in Fruits Basket and OHSHC). In many cases, differentiation might include a symbol within that box to denote speaker (like one of the zodiac animals or a ricecake for Tohru in Fruits Basket or the glasses for Kyoya in OHSHC). Or a particular font or style might be used, like Huninozuka's flowers all over his comments. Like most manga tendencies, following dialog and various trains of thought over diverse panels and through complex relationships gets easier with practice.

Sound effects and action effects. Yeah, I know, sound effects? Well, some I can see: crash, bam, clatter, zap, etc. And I can understand some actions that aren't quite obvious ("moves hair," "fingersnap," and the like), but they often include the sounds of footsteps and heartbeats. The words used to describe them often change; for heartbeat, I've seen: b-bump, b-dump, dokin, thathump. And why do I need to have footsteps? These special effects are often part of the drawing in kanji, which is sometimes translated in the English versions and sometimes left as is without explanation. (Ironically, with the volunteer translations, they seem to translate the effects the official versions don't - and vice versa.)

Wow, that was more than I expected. I guess I'll have to go over the stereotypes and other weirdnesses next time.

MangaMania: Vampire Knight

2011-03-02T15:06:00.007-06:00

Vampire Knight by Matsuri Hino is the last of my Christmas manga experiments to become a "gotta have 'em all" manga, though it's straddling the line between "gotta have 'em all" and "Compelling but not a favorite." To date, though, I tend to own them all whether they fit in either category. If I have the urge to read a series more than once, I buy them all and that applies to Vampire Knight, though it is far different in tone, style and story than the majority I own.

Despite how "in" vampires are (and my fondness for the Twilight series), I am not a vampire type person. I've never understood the fascination with vampires in general and don't go out of my way to read vampiric stories. What I like are good characters and any scenario (fantasy/science fiction) that builds a world that makes sense within its own framework. If characters appeal to me, I'm pretty lax on that second part, too. If a vampire story happens to do this, create appealing character(s) or a world that intrigues, I'll read it. For those bothered by Twilight, at least these vampires don't sparkle.

When I read the first one, I was on the fence on whether I wanted to pursue it. Then my daughter had me watch the first few episodes of anime and, rereading it, I became more and more intrigued by Kaname's character and the world-building regarding vampires/vampire hunters (genetic, by the way), and humans.

Anime? Yes Volumes of manga: 13 (11 Eng) Status: Ongoing

My rating: Gotta have 'em all (barely)

Age range: It's listed for older teen and should be (16+), primarily (I think) for some pretty grisly violence and no shortage of blood and death. Although there is no nudity or direct allusions to sex, much of the bloodletting is distinctly sensual.

Taboos and "warnings": Lots of bloody and graphic violence and horrific deaths. A great deal of veiled and unveiled sensuality. The vampires have their own rules, which also encompass incest and enslavement. Some hints at homosexuality and masochism, but nothing too overt.

Premise: Cross Academy has a day class (human) and a night class (vampires, actively working on measures to reduce friction between humans and vampires). The vampires are led by one of the last remaining pureblood vampires, Kaname, who saved the heroine, Yuki, from a vampire when she was five years old and who maintains a sincere and protective attachment to her. Yuki and Zero are both adoptees of the Academy headmaster, are the only ones who know the true nature of the night class, and are tasked with keeping the day and night classes separate. This is further complicated with Zero's antipathy toward vampires (as his family of vampire hunters were killed by one) while he slowly turns into a vampire thanks to a pureblood's bite.

Common manga themes: Self-restraint is romantic?

What works: First, at center stage, is the artwork. Very gothic, with gorgeous "uniforms" and very evocative imagery, I'd be lying if I told you that the artwork wasn't a big part of the appeal. Kaname is particularly beautiful, while Zero is drawn for beauty that seems somehow more down-to-earth, edgy. I found the artwork for the various girls and female characters far less compelling, but I tended to find their personalities the same way, so that might be related.

Secondly, I did appreciate the depth and complexity of this secondary world, with its long and bloody history, of vampires, vampire hunters and humans. It's not without flaw or contradiction and, in many ways, it seems amoral, but it has its poignancy and true emotion as well. A great many ins and outs and subtleties play through it and it's rather fascinating to follow them around to find out yet another secret. Actually, as more is revealed, more becomes tidy and holds together with the big linchpin to the whole thing being Kaname, not the youthful Kaname Kuran everyone thinks he is but the endlessly old Kaname who was as much a factor in the decline of vampires' ascendency as he was the creation of the vampire hunters.

I like how blood is a metaphor for so many things. It is used not only to transfer thoughts and emotions, and memories, but also love (a vampire's thirst can only be quenched by the blood of the one they love), longevity, medicine, nutrition, mutagent, control, power (including specific vampire powers) and even directly as a weapon, as used by Kaname, his "father," his "uncle" and also Senri Shiki. Blood is also used to seal spells, particularly the one that makes a vampire "human" and erases the memory of their former lives. I like that vampires frequently drink each other's blood as opposed to just preying on humans. There is also a modicum of humor, though it's more a sidelight rather than pervasive.

Kaname is another big draw. Beautifully and poignantly drawn, he is a man of mysteries, with his overt protective adoration of Yuki contrasting with some pretty dark doings involving considerable violence. Coupled with an otherworldly control (all but unheard of among vampires) is a rather amoral willingness to use people to serve his purposes. To all outward appearances, he is far more humane and well-intentioned than most of his ilk, and yet . . . Those loyal to him are fiercely so, including both Yuki and the Cross Academy headmaster. I find the characters of a number of the night class students appealing, even though we only get tantalizing glimpses.

Zero also is fascinating, the ultimate conflicted individual, hating vampires passionately, yet unable to preclude his own vampire nature from manifesting. Yuki's devotion keeps him from being torn apart by these conflicting drives (at the cost of her own blood), while both the vampires and the vampires hunters use him mercilessly to suit themselves. Yet, being used, he has considerable will and ends up using those that use him to serve his own purposes. His love for Yuki is touching and tragic. I suspect one reason why this manga continued past the "end" was a sizeable faction of fans who want to see Zero get the girl (as my daughter does).

Favorite character: Duh. Kaname. I like Zero, but Kaname's absolute devotion to Yuki, not just her person but her happiness, won me over and his complex history and ever-sad eyes are fascinating in the extreme.

Quotes:

Zero: Drinking blood on campus is strictly forbidden. Did you lose your mind, drunk on the scent of blood, vampire?

Zero: I couldn't stop myself from devouring you. I may kill the next human I target as my prey. Shoot me. You're afraid of me, aren't you? Hold the gun with both hands and aim straight. Aim for the center. It's not a crime to kill a vampire.
Yuki: I didn't understand anything but I've lived with you for four years. I'm not afraid. I can stop you. If that time comes. If you want me to stop you, I will stop you.

Yagari: The pureblood vampire holds her so gently in his arms... I don't give a damn why you treat that little girl so differently but of course you realize what she's done. You must be seething with rage, right? Yet you won't do anything, just like a proper honor student. Why is that? Why won't you tear Zero to shreds?
Yuki: It's so that I won't lose my girl.

Kaname: By the way, I've never told you why I'm pretending not to notice what has happened to you. I know how precarious the peace is here at Cross Academy so I thought about who could act as Yuki's shield in this place. You will not double-cross her because you owe her that much. That is why I'm allowing you to live.

Kaname: I cannot have you die now. I've allowed you to live so you could serve Yuki. I know you won't betray her--
Zero: You're assuming things as usual...
Kaname: Oh, but I know because our feelings for Yuki are probably the same.
Zero: I...I only want Yuki to smile from the bottom of her heart.
Kaname: Me too.
Zero: I don't want her to sacrifice herself!
Kaname: Exactly. (He offers his own blood to Zero) Don't ever forget for whom this blood was offered, Zero. No one hates vampires more than you yet you need blood more than any vampire. I think you're the most vampirelike of us all.

Kaname: Yuki, get out of the way. I cannot forgive the man who aimed that gun at you, a weapon that could destroy you, even if it was for a mere moment. I will not forgive him even if you hate me for five hundred or a thousand years.
Yuki: Please, I don't want to make you say something so sad.
Kaname: All right take some time to say goodbye to him. [Sucker]

What I didn't like: Yuki. She's not the worst romantic lead out there for me, but I couldn't get behind her thinking for most of the series. I respect her fierce loyalty, her absolute lack of fear when it comes to death, and even some decisions she made, but she's largely clueless on what's going on around her. She jumps into the fray even when its abysmally stupid to do so and seems to have no consideration for the many people consumed with keeping her safe. I can respect that the "men" who love her do so unstintingly and without reservation (as, admittedly, she does them), but I still do a lot of eye-rolling. I'd be happier if she were just a bit less clueless or inept.

Also, I'm disturbed by the pacing. The story went along quite bracingly for the first ten volumes and had what seemed like a nice tidy ending at the end of volume 10 (48 chapters), what's frequently referred to as the first arc. At the end of that story, the world order as it was is no more, with the Academy's night class a thing of the past, and most of the vampire world turned upside down. The distinction between arcs is so significant and the ending for the first arc so pat that I actually think she'd intended to end it there and was pushed into carrying it forward by rabid fans or publishing dictates.

I'll admit I don't entirely get what's going on in the second arc, but the pacing is considerably slower, with nothing coming to resolution (so far, with 21 more chapters) and some things I can't fathom, like the current relationship with Kaname and Yuki, which should look like marriage but is apparently something else? The style of drawing has changed as well, with it now dominated by a sort of wispy pencil type minimalist drawing and every vampire having the same somewhat empty eyes. Still pretty artwork, but nowhere near as powerful and with minimal contrast between the extensive details and the minimalist.

Vampire Knights has eleven books out in English and chapters available out to at least Chapter 69 as volunteer scans on-line. The anime is dubbed in English, at least for the first arc and the second season is coming out as well. Zero's voice in that is the melodious Vic Mignogna (same as OHSHC's Tamaki). As always, if you love it, buy the books. And, yes, I did..

Manga Mania!

2011-02-22T18:57:00.002-06:00

I admit it. I'm obsessed. I took off Friday so I could have a four day weekend and, aside from hanging with the hubby and the two small children, I spent it all immersed in new manga. That's right, I had a terrific time with it and fell in love with two more series.

Sorry for those of you who wanted to see me around, but I don't really regret it. I love getting immersed or falling in love with new characters.

I love it. I haven't entirely figured out why I love it, but I do. I'm going to add a column to the blog on the side with a list of my favorite manga series and, given that I'm between novels at the moment until I get inspired (and because manga is behind my drawing interest at the moment, too), I thought I'd introduce some of my favorites and why in this blog.

Because, hey, the better I understand why I like them, the better I might be able to harness what appeals to improve my own work, assuming it's not all the art.

So, next time, that's what I'll do.

Before I go, some important caveats:

(1) I read mostly shoujo manga, intended for teenage girls, so it's not all encompassing.
(2) Plot, the mangas I've read have such laughably stupid stupid plots and motivations that make no sense - of course, I always felt that way about hero comic books, too, so that might just be me.
(3) social mores and priorities are not the same world-wide.

So, as I go into the mangas, I'll start with my favorites I've found so far. For those of you who'd rather stab yourself in a the eye with a sharp stick than read manga, well, feel free to skip 'em.

Not a Salesperson

2011-02-05T13:26:00.002-06:00

For those of you wondering what I'm up to, well, I've been going over the Bete novels again. I'm going to try to find an agent and/or publisher for them.

Only problem is, I can't seem to write a query to save my life. Or rather, I can't write a good query to save my life. I mean it seems like a good query when I'm writing it, but the more I read it, the more I have others read it, the more and more it seems "meh."

I read Query Shark religiously. I know intellectually what needs to go in it, but I also know the voice is the key. I can get voice is a hopeless mishmash that confuses and dazes. I can get the formula though it reads as dry as a Pentagon briefing. Despite my best intentions, my queries stink to high heaven.

My husband says I'm not a salesman. He does not mistake the case. I'm the sort of salesperson who could keep people from buying what they came to get. I stink. Part of it is that they are books about characters with the plot largely incidental, so the formula is less than effective. The characters are the selling points, in my opinion.

I also don't do lots of other things that engenders getting published. My first paragraphs are not stellar - I grew up reading classics where you might not even meet the main characters until a third of the way through the book, where character development was everything. It's what I like, but also, apparently, passe. It's not how you get noticed.

Perhaps, and it's a real possibility, my writing isn't really notably better than my sales pitch. Hard to be objective. Perhaps I'll never be published because I can't promote my work properly, even if it is good. Sobering thought, that. But plausible.

Also the drawing has taken a step back, partially because of a crowded work schedule recently and partially because stepping out with new poses and Tander's features didn't work so well. I'll have to go back and regroup and try again.

And I will. I may end up 83 years old and unpublished, but it won't be because I gave up.

But a couple of the days in between are bound to be disheartening.

Always Gotta Be Different

2011-01-29T10:04:00.004-06:00

With anything other than motor skills (acronyms and the names of business associates), I tend to be a quick study, the kind that usually does better learning in her own way. Self-study and self-taught has been my way in general because I tend to know best how I learn. That even applied, to some extent, in singing.

I had a couple of books on how to draw manga that I'd bought for my more artistic daughter and husband in the hopes they could be the artist, but they never pursued it. I looked through them, but, again, I just can't see going that way. I have no interest in drawing people as series of ellipses and then filling in over that.

As I was planning to do this, but still finishing my latest novel, I spent a lot of time trying to decide how I wanted to start. The challenge, I figured, was coming up with a face for a character I was satisfied with, then practicing drawing that character with (a) different expressions and (b) in different poses. Drawing the same character consistently, that I figured would be challenging. When I had one character down, I'd design and do the same with then next key character and do that until I had all the main characters laid out. By then, I could start thinking about what else I needed to work on.

So, last week I started. I'm using the worlds cheapest mechanical pencil (0.7 mm unrefillable papermate you can buy by the jillions from Sams), a vunderbar white eraser (Pentel Tri-Eraser) I would recommend for ANYONE who likes to draw or draft (if you're going to spend money, that's where I'd spend it), and a $2.35 sketchpad I bought from Walmart. The tri-eraser has it all over my beloved click eraser I use at work because it has three sharp points for doing detailed erasing.

I don't do rough drafts, largely because I'm too perfectionist. I'd get frustrated and stop. I know nothing about using models. I found a pair of eyes in manga I wanted to use for my main character in manga because I thought they were so expressive.

The next two days, I worked on this picture of Tander, hoping to make a reference Tander I can use for learning and drawing the character in different expressions, poses and clothing. I drew them the first day I worked on this, using features from manga I liked (different faces) and then putting them together or adapting them until I had what I wanted. Only the eyes are really stolen. It is not retouched.

You can see I have some work to improve my symmetry and you can clearly see the eraser earned it's keep. I may also, as I work on other aspects, expressions, whatnot, want to change a few things.

However, as a starting place, I'm actually pretty pleased. I was able to do something more easily than I expected. Manga is pretty low on requiring too much detail. I also discovered as I redrew eyes multiple times, that I drew them faster and consistently (even as I varied them in position and size) the more I drew. I thought that boded well.

Some of you might have been uninterested in my little experiment. If you were, sorry. And sorry for those of you looking at this and shaking your head at my obvious lack of training/ability. I expect it to be a slow learning process.

Even so, I'm pleasantly surprised at my progress. I thought some of you all might be, too.

Update: Note to self. It does not increase my confidence to see my clumsy sketch, then scroll down and see the panels from Shinobi Life. I do have a long road ahead.

A Little Perspective

2011-01-26T19:07:00.005-06:00

Just goes to show that one should follow one's own advice. So, I read my new book to my normal collaborator (who wasn't on this one because, hey, it's a YA romance) and, surprise, he hated it because it's not his thing.

So I started hating it even though I LOVED it. I did two things. I addressed a repetition/pacing issue by mixing up perspectives in the novel (complete rework) and I told a friend of mine about the characters. And, she completely got it.

Which argues, at least some of the time, matching audience to novel matters. I feel better (though I'm not touching it again for at least a month). She got a kick out of a chance to read it. And I'm on a more even keel.

So, I'm going to tell you what I'm going to try to tackle next, in the non-noveling category. I've mentioned before that, when it comes to drawing, I lack talent. My sister, Shakespeare hogged not only all her artistic talent but the stuff that should have gone to me. That's my position and I'm sticking with it. Instead, I have tried to express much of the same thing with words.

Well, my obsession with manga has made me realize that just isn't good enough. Take a look at that four beautiful panels from the wonderful manga Shinobi Life by Konami Shouko (which is absolutely worth reading over and over again). Note that I am an advocate for purchasing the manga and I'll have the next three of this one as soon as they come out. [I took these images from the manga site MangaFox]:
Admittedly, this will mean more to me since I read the 31 chapters that came before this.

My point is, I had got a wealth of subtle information from these page, despite the minimal dialog. Subtleties in character and emotion that would have taken me far longer to express far less effectively in words.

And that is driving me crazy, so, I'm going to do something most likely fraught with failure. I'm going to try to draw some manga, notably turning my first novel into one. It will take a long time. I may never show you the end result because, hey, I'm a perfectionist. But I'm going to try and use that pursuit as something to fill in my in-between novel times so my subconscious has time to cook up something good.

Wish me luck. I'll need it.

Mixed Blessings

2011-01-20T20:40:00.002-06:00

Well, I'm back. I finished Saving Tessa which I really loved writing. Too bad it sucks. I hate that.

I know it sucks, even know why it sucks. Not sure if it's fixable. It bothered me so much I tried to rework it instead of doing the smart thing and just setting it aside until I had perspective.

So, in six/eight weeks, when I HAVE perspective (I hope), I'll read it and the five chapters I reworked (separate file) and see if there's anything to be salvaged.

When I first had the idea I thought it might turn into one of those ideas that would never be marketable, never suit anyone but myself. It wasn't a complete waste of time, if only because I DID love writing it and have characters that, if the opportunity presents itself, I can put in a story with a bit more meat on it maybe.

I don't know. I did mention I don't have perspective at the moment. I've got something else I've been meaning to play with. Next time, maybe I'll tell you what it is.

Wishing you joy in your endeavors.

Writer Beware

2011-01-15T10:58:00.002-06:00

Janet Reid has a warning on her blog about a contest that not only bilks unsuspecting writers of all rights to their own work, but money as well with no assurance a prize would even be awarded (as it depends on the "number of entries").

The best defense for those of us who dream of someday becoming published is education and information. If you missed her warning, you can find it here. Check it out. See for yourself and note the warning phrases any writer should look for when seeing an offer that looks "too good to be true."

It always amazes me when the people behind these nefarious plans step forward to defend themselves.

Be aware.

Tessa Miller Because We Like To Be Fair

2011-01-03T21:30:00.003-06:00

I've told you I appreciate Dylan Chroz, really identify with him, but I can't have him partnered with someone who doesn't carry her own weight. Part of the fun of working on my current novel is the contrast between the way Dylan thinks and the way she thinks, though they often agree and are so devoted to one another. The way the see the world and attack problems is utterly different

And doesn't that make it more interesting? Or maybe that's just me.

Chapter 11

She needed him, not because he took care of her, but because he was the best part of her life. She looked forward to challenging herself by challenging him, talking to him, playing with him, touching him. And these bastards were planning to use her to hurt him. Well, they made one major miscalculation on that one. No one was using her to hurt Dylan Chroz, not for long, or she wasn't Tessa Miller. Dylan might have bested her in a number of subjects, but no one else was bloody well going to do it. And no one else was going to pay for her mistake.

Chapter 12

"Actually, our intelligence tells us Dylan Chroz is unnaturally attached to you and notoriously protective." [kidnapper]

"I haven't been much impressed with your intelligence. Maybe he's just a nice guy." [Tessa]

"You'd best hope you're wrong, If he has no interest in you, then the only value you have at that point is what I can sell you for overseas. Fortunately for me, that's a considerable sum. Your youth and obvious innocence hold more value than culture and class to those markets. Even the spirit you have can demand a premium for those that like to destroy such things."

She had never been so frightened in her life. Damned if she'd let him know. "Nice to know someone still buys American. I was starting to wonder."

"I am. How do I know you still have her, that she's still alive?" [Dylan]

"Tessa, do be kind enough to set Mr. Chroz' mind at ease," the Shadow Man said.

Tessa said nothing, even when the grip on her shoulder threatened to separate it.

"Well?" Dylan asked. "Or are you just yanking my chain?" "Yanking my chain," was one of Tessa's pet phrases. She was surprised to hear Dylan use it since he rarely used anything like slang.

"Tessa, I've warned you not to try to cross me. Guido, take out a finger." [Guido is not Italian - long story]

Guido started with the left hand. Tessa was double-jointed, particularly in her hands. Dislocation was a frequent problem, so she knew what was coming and exactly how painful it would be. She managed to keep herself to a grunt. Pinkies where the worst, but were least useful.

She glared at the Shadow Man.

"Guido, she's being difficult. Go for the thumb. And, if that doesn't work, an elbow. If we keep moving up the body, we will eventually come across some bone that will break Ms. Miller."

"No, wait!" Dylan said from the phone. "Tessa, please, please, just say something. Don't make me listen to them break you to pieces."

"Damn it, Dylan, will you stop protecting me!"

She heard his sigh over the phone. "Tessa," he whispered. "Thank God."

"Dylan, you idiot, you're agnostic."

Chapter 13

Sometimes, even the best plans go awry. Tessa wasn't saying it had been a good plan—it wasn't—but it had had the merit of being simple.

At first, it looked like it worked. A little earnest pot stirring—moving around in a suspicious way—got no reaction, so she had quickly gone to town on the hinges with the nail file. The nail file didn't survive the procedure—a dislocated finger was a bit of handicap—but its death was not in vain. A little quiet wiggling and the door was free.

The outer door was dead-bolted as well, though she'd really hoped it wouldn't be. She'd hoped so not only because she was all out of nail files, but also because the hinges were not accessible on this door. Oh, well, Plan B was to break the door down, but it was a heavy metal door in a metal door frame. Not impossible, but more work than she liked, time consuming and noisy. As she tapped a foot, thinking, she noticed a dent in the wall and that gave her the idea for Plan C. She tapped her fist along the wall. Imagine that! This substandard building had studs almost four feet apart. Who knew she'd be grateful for slipshod building codes? She tapped on either side of the dent, made she sure knew where the nearest studs were, warned Susie to stand back and punched right through the wall. They used just quarter inch sheetrock on either side. A few kicks and she had a hole big enough to dive through. "Wait here!" she told Susie. And dove through.

As she brushed off the gypsum dust, she counted herself grateful she'd gone with plan C. The door had a bar across it and a few other locks. In fact, it would have been quite the deterrent if the walls hadn't been just one step up from cardboard. Well, no sense worrying about how her plans might have gone wrong. The room she was in was much larger, still with the plain concrete floor. At a guess, she bet it was once wall to wall cubicles, but now it had a couple of sleeping bags on air mattresses and two bean bag chairs in front of a large flat screen TV with video game consoles and a cable box. Given the mounds of discarded chip bags and beer bottles, she suspected her captors spent most of their time in here. She'd also bet this was just from today and that the relative tidiness of the room meant they'd cleaned up before the boss showed up. Or right after.

Fortunately, it was deserted, the television left on in the midst of play for what looked like "Borderlands." She unlocked everything on the door, but told Susie to hold tight while she scouted the way out. She didn't foresee any problems because there was no lock on this door and she presumed it was a straight shot (though perhaps not straight route) to freedom . . . except Guido and Spic, now short their bandanas, came in at that moment, carrying a new supply of greasy snacks and beer. So, Plan C (sneak quietly out with no one the wiser excepting one insignificant hole in the wall) turned into Plan D, (kick the butts of two half-drunk rednecks).

Dylan Xavier Chroz In the "Flesh"

2010-12-23T01:55:00.001-06:00

I told you about him, but I'm all for you deciding for yourselves. Be warned. There is a preponderance of references here on his overthinking and feelings regarding Tessa. That's because it's central to the story and because depth of feeling does not bring along with it innate knowledge on what to do when something really matters. I personally find that both charming and humorous.

From Chapter 2

Dylan was not the slightest bit melodramatic, even emotional, as a general rule. He didn't see his response to Tessa as romantic or fantastic at all but as a single irrefutable and immutable fact. He loved her and she had changed his world into something worth living.

Chapter 3

Tessa said nothing, but held herself stiffly. She did have a temper. She waited until they were halfway through the school before hissing, "I could have taken care of that myself."

"I haven't the least doubt that you could have nor that watching you kick his rather pansy ass would have afforded anyone of taste no little satisfaction. But I wanted to do it and I was faster," he replied. Not to mention that no one—no one—man-handled Tessa and walked straight for a week. Tessa could have taken him down, but she would have been less inclined to make it painful and humiliating.

"I don't need a bodyguard, Dylan. Seriously. I'm quite capable of taking care of myself. Right now, they'll likely think I kicked him in the balls, not that you hit a pressure point that I know as well as you do." She did know the pressure point and many others. Dylan had made sure of that personally. He also knew, first-hand, how effectively she had learned it since she had tested her knowledge on Dylan—at his own insistence. He sincerely hoped she never used it on him in earnest. At least he hadn't screamed.

"I expect anyone who saw I was there will have no doubt who hurt him. If you are called into the office, as I highly doubt you will be, you need only have them contact me. I'll take full responsibility."

"And you'd do the same if you were halfway across the school. If I get called into the office, I'll take care of it myself, Dylan. I don't need to be insulated from all ugliness. Have you so little faith in me?"

He was genuinely shocked at the notion, so shocked he stopped dead. "No, Tessa. Of course not! Who better than I to know what you're capable of. You're incredible, talented, brilliant, and driven. I know you could have taken care of him and half a dozen like him," he told her, earnestly.

She sighed and grabbed his arm as she so often did, laying her head on his shoulder. "But?" she prompted, tugging him forward.

For Tessa, ever and always, the truth. "But, I wanted to do it." Just like he wanted to protect her, give her every opportunity, and make her happy. Did she need him to? Perhaps not. But he wanted to do it anyway. “I'm not altruistic," he assured her with perfect honesty. "Everything I have ever done has been done to suit myself.”

Chapter 5

His mind dispassionately contemplated hiring a professional to ensure he would be an skilled and careful lover for Tessa. Despite an instinctive antipathy to the idea, he evaluated several positive aspects. He considered proposing it to Tessa until he realized that, if she endorsed the idea, she would likely expect the same type of instruction for the same reasons. His revulsion at that notion was sufficient to make him realize that the idea was very unlikely to find favor. Better not try it.

From Chapter 7

He'd hardly slept. She liked him, perhaps loved him. He hadn't even allowed himself to expect that. After hours of tossing and turning, he'd looked for distraction.

In the interest of furthering his knowledge, he looked to the internet in search of more detailed sexual instruction, and found far far more than he had bargained for. Perhaps such things were of intellectual interest, but they were, across the board, a far cry from what he had envisioned with Tessa.

Feeling a bit disoriented, he cleared registers, cookies and history, shut down his browser, ran a virus scan, and vowed to be far more selective in his terms for any future searches he might contemplate.

Then he thought he should get her something. If they were dating, surely, he could buy her things outright, no? No more passing by a jewelry store or clothing store, frustrated because the perfect item for her beckoned and he had no right to buy it for her. He recalled a set of tanzanite and another of sapphires that would have suited her exceptionally well. And a lovely dress, full length, of deep blood-red silk. She'd need rubies for that.

Perhaps that was too much? Overwhelming? He had to admit he had a tendency to overkill when it came to Tessa. No sense scaring her silly. Perhaps going slow was a good idea in every aspect.

He contemplated an on-line retailer, like Amazon.com, then realized he had absolutely no idea what he should buy her. He could buy her any number of things, but what did she want? Shouldn't each gift mean something, reflect his deep understanding of who she was as a person? If so, why was he stumped on what to buy her? Shouldn't he know?

He was overthinking things again. She didn't care about stuff. He'd ample proof of that. Or prestige. Or travel, or not much. She liked books and learning new things and trying new things, and challenges and him. He'd known that, of course, he'd always known she'd liked him. He'd just had been too afraid to read too much into that, afraid of expecting something from this lively fascinating person he could never earn as he was relatively dull and uninteresting.

That's it! He could make something for her. She made presents for him every birthday, something crafty and clever and perfect in every way. Each one was a work of art and treasured. He just wasn't crafty. Oh, he could probably make something, but it took some time to develop a skill, and special materials. And they frequently took time to create, too, like the crewel work she sewn that hung over his fireplace or the needlepoint on the opposite wall.

For the first time, he regretted his inability to create meaningful poetry or fanciful stories. He could write in rhyme and rhythm, but the facility to make them alive, to touch the heart, that was beyond him. He'd have to think of something else.

They should go on a date. They could head out tomorrow, just the two of them, to spend time alone together . . just like they always did, but, somehow, more romantical.

Perfect.

But where?

In his whole life, his brain had never been this sluggish and unresponsive. Instead of the dozens of destinations it should have provided (which would be nerve-wracking enough), his mind was completely blank.

He almost called Lawrence [his chauffeur] for advice before realizing it was three in the morning.

Meet Dylan Chroz (Really, this time)

2010-12-21T17:15:00.002-06:00

I said, some time ago, that I was all excited about a new character, one of those uber-bright people that don't seem possible, largely because I identified with him so completely. Yes, I know that still sounds conceited.

Well, I'm still pleased to know him even though I've been too distracted with other things the past week or so to really work with him much since. I will though. I have some time off. I got sidetracked on what I saw were some of the challenges for being "too" smart, but I really want to focus on Dylan because I want you to understand him, even if you don't like him.

I could tell you what everyone else sees: he's brilliant, with a perfect recall (a genius friend of me once explained that everyone has a perfect memory; what they might lack is recall) and an innate logical ability that can address details and big picture simultaneously (not impossible, I do that, too. It's the obvious that often gets me and that's true for Dylan, too). He can instantly size things up and plan out action (think Sherlock Holmes in the recent film) and has the motor skills I lack.

He's also rich and already, at the age of seventeen, enjoys a substantial autonomy, partially because his father does not have his technical abilities (and his grandfather did and used Dylan from an early age) and partially because his personality is forceful. He's good-looking, though he doesn't see himself that way. Too busy.

But that's what everyone sees.

He's been, however, largely isolated from any affection. His mother despised him. His grandfather used him (and despised his father). His father didn't really try to know him until Dylan was nearing his teens. Other than that, his life was filled with fawning or resentful servants and acquaintance, most of which never saw past the obvious.

However, like myself, Dylan is capable of great emotional depth however dispassionate he might appear, depth, in fact, in direct proportion to his intellect. As I am, he's somewhat all or nothing. When he loves, it is absolute.

Enter Tessa. Smart, pugnacious, impulsive, determined, imminently honest and honorable, she is as isolated in her way as he is, except she has the love of family. And an unshakable sense of self, that instantly draws Dylan who had all but stopped thinking of himself as a person, but only as a thing to be used. As he, in turn, saw people around him.

Tessa wants nothing from him, but only demands from herself, including the urge to one-up Dylan. Her unwillingness to take engenders an obsessive need to give. Her regard for herself--and himself--as people, not tools, changes his outlook entirely. (I know some are skeptical this is plausible. I have to believe otherwise; I've lived it.)

At no moment in the book is his unshakable devotion to Tessa in doubt. For the readers, I doubt her love for Dylan is also obvious (though he is slow to acknowledge it - long story). But then, love is only part of it. It's when Tessa is threatened, endangered, that we see both Dylan's strengths and weaknesses in the clearest light, his abilities and his limitations, what makes him human not robot.

And we see that he wasn't necessarily as alone as he thought he was.

Next time, a taste.

Gosh, I hope things work out well for Dylan. I really like him.

Having It Easy Ain't Easy: Sidebar on Birds of a Feather

2010-12-13T23:00:00.002-06:00

Over my last two posts on this subject (here and here), two different people brought up putting gifted children among their peers, where their differences are not so marked and where they could conceivably develop social skills among less stratified peers. One noted it with clear approval (if not obligation on the part of the parent to ensure gifted children are surrounded by similar peers), the other more in the terms of a question so good I'm posting it here:

One question I read into your post is whether it is more important (1) to bring up children in such groups that will minimize "being different" so that they may develop social skills in a friendlier (less bullying) environment or (2) to allow a more diverse environment so as to force them to learn that it's acceptable to be independent, to be who they really are rather than who they think the crowd wants them to be. Should they pursue path one while young and vulnerable and then slowly attempt path two only after they've developed strong social skills and can withstand the blowback from expressing their real differences?

What's the answer? I don't know. Nor am I readily convinced there is one good answer. But, I can tell you what I learned going from town to town, living in small districts and large districts, with strong gifted and talent programs and none to speak of as well as what I learned when I went to college.

One caveat is that I can only discuss this subject with regards to US schools. In an environment (such as found in certain European and Asian school systems) where being bright is socially acceptable, if not prized, much of this may not be the same.

First, from an academic standpoint, gifted and talent programs are almost essential (if not just plain essential) to not discourage or squelch the potential of an extraordinary mind. Dragging along a bright mind that "gets it" immediately, at a pace convenient for the lowest common denominator is good way to discourage any interest in learning or school. Bright children readily become disruptive influences, bored, desperate for diversion and other more dangerous mischief if they don't have adequate constructive activity.

Stratification allows different paces so that a teacher isn't forced to either drag those less adept along a pace they can't match, bore the bright students nearly to tears, or try to teach two or more paces concurrently in the same class (and, yes, teachers try this). Do note that yanking a struggling child forward at a pace they can't possible match isn't any less discouraging than bogging down the pace for bright mind. It's not just pace either. Many of the methods that work best for children who don't necessarily understand the concepts (repetition, memorization, formulaic teaching) are counterproductive to very bright children, either providing useless make work or failing to spark any mental stimulation.

Stratification is challenging, however, for smaller schools and earlier grades given the unforgiving fiscal realities (which will continue as long as local, state and federal governments continue to regard a viable education as a "nice-to-have"). The smaller the pool, the less gradation you can put between classes and the more the brightest or slowest have to work outside their given path. Given that being bright doesn't always reflect ability in all subjects, grade school classes (where all subjects are frequently taught in the same classroom) stratification can be more challenging when math brains with backwards verbal/writing skills end up in the same classrooms of brilliantly articulate children who can't visualize math easily.

This is one of the conundrums pertinent to Mike's question. Putting bright children together early in their social development when all the children are learning mostly academically and the same curriculum has a great deal to recommend it. It's just harder to do given the limitations in the student pool size and the challenges inherent in the fact that all bright children aren't created the same.

Another problem is that identifying a bright gifted and talented child isn't a black and white business and early testing may not identify a mind that catches up and sprints forward at a little later date. Too frequently, an early test determines placement for an entire gradeschool career, leaving a mind that "gets it" long discouraged and anti-school by the time they graduate (with the same social issues discussed in earlier posts). But another part of the problem is just the reliance on tests to decide.

At a higher level (middle/high school), stratification is easier with a larger pool of students and more specialization (i.e. math genius isn't forced into highest level English classes etc.), but social awkwardness may already be deeply entrenched and the academic stratification has to compete with other forms of stratification, including wealth, race, beauty, interests, athletics, etc.

Still, with all those challenges, I think stratification is still a good thing for most gifted children (and less gifted children as well) at as many levels as possible, but for academic reasons more than anything else.

However, I'm less convinced it's always better from a social standpoint. Here's why.

Gifted does not mean identical or compatible. Among the gifted, you might find creative geniuses, math savants, logical experts and people who can retain and regurgitate anything they've been given, and to varying degrees from the somewhat quicker than average to the "that ain't human" levels. That makes for a wildly divergent mix of personalities and talents and doesn't assure anyone is "normal" or has a potential friend readily identifiable. In my own experience, I found my own way of thinking outside the norm, whether it was the five student superclass in the tiny town in Maryland or the thirty student college-bound seniors at the largest high school in Nevada.

Being the top of the latter class, yet thinking differently than most of the others who seemed to generally have more "standard" smartness made me feel more of an outsider than ever, even though I was a favorite of teachers (or perhaps because). I was also poor, articulate, proud of my brains, sarcastic, and responsible. I was backward socially and I found my bright peers were no more tolerant of it than any other group I'd ever known. In fact, I was loathed far more in my G&T classes than the classes I took that were with general students (Driver's Ed, Spanish, World History, Health), possibly because those interactions had more to do with personality than brains and partially because sarcasm and stylelessness apply to more than brainiacs. I actually found myself most socially accepted in the ROTC crowd, which is ironic given how little interest I've ever had in the armed services. But they were friendly and nonjudgmental.

Competition. As much as kids don't like the "smart" kid in class, most kids aren't personally offended by it. They know they have other interests, other strengths. However, make it a class of nothing but people who see intelligence as their bailiwick, and the competition can get very ugly, very quickly. This can become more pronounced when children, used to setting the curve find themselves in an environment where they are barely competing at all or when there is still a bright frontrunner standing head and shoulders above the rest. The front runner can be socially brutalized (particularly if they think in ways that are outside the norm the others have), but it can also be demoralizing for those that are no longer at the top. When they were teased and made fun of by "regular" kids, they at least had something they excelled at. Now, they aren't even the best at that . . .

I saw this in college a great deal. I had the highest level of academic scholarship (limited to 15) at my university and most of the other recipients were very bright, very talented, with far more other scholarships as well. Of the other ones I knew personally for more than a year (three of them), one flunked out, and two lost their scholarships and changed to easier majors. The one that flunked out even told me I was directly responsible for her flunking out (GPA 1.2 the semester we were roommates) - she "couldn't compete." (Utter nonsense.) Part of that was, naturally, being under the tight control of someone else's discipline instead of developing your own. Part of that was that they weren't prepared for things to be actually challenging instead of as easy as it had always been. Part of that is that, with no one to tell them what to do, they started doing "fun" diversionary things they'd never had the chance to do before (and it took over their lives or at least enough of their lives they couldn't do the work). Part of it was that, when things started to go south, they had no internal mechanism to deal with it. They had no idea what to do or how to recover once they started failing. So they gave up.

Subgroup biases against visible brilliance. There are certain subgroups where you have a "built-in" social group where being visibly academically brilliant is an anathema. Girls are one; it's not a coincidence that I still number more male friends than female friends. I wish that last statement wasn't true more than you would believe and I saw it less than many because I was fortunate that all of my teachers were passionately pro-smart women (as was my father, even if he didn't always express it well). I have heard stories from others that this can be true of other minority groups like blacks and Latinos. Some subgroups venerate intelligence and academic prowess in the opposite manner, like the Vietnamese community of my friend Phuong Nga. But it means that putting bright kids in classes of their peers doesn't entirely insulate them from social bullying and the like. And not just from the community.

In such an environment, being bright anyway (in a visible manner) has social consequences also in the expectations of others outside that community. In many areas of this country, people will assume black children, for instance really aren't that bright. That kind of thinking flavors their willingness to teach a brilliant child to his potential, but also, in those children who excel anyway, tends to allow people to regard those bright black children with suspicion. For women, it can be equally marked and more socially acceptable to make those kinds of sweeping patronizing assumptions. Several of my engineering coworkers (female) had stories of teachers that literally asked them what a "pretty little thing like you is doing in an engineering class like this." That didn't happen to me, but in college, I could scare guys away in a heartbeat. I just had to tell them my major (Engineering Physics). (That didn't happen in high school, probably because most people already knew who I was and just didn't approach. I was a pretty girl, too.) Ironically, because of my own social backwardness, the men who didn't run screaming as I approached generally ended up friends either because I was too dense to notice advances or they were too cautious in approaching me. Or because we were just better friends.

For many, just this kind of repercussion is more than reason enough to hide one's intelligence. I accepted (2nd grade) being ostracized and took it as a given. I can literally remember the moment when I decided I wasn't going to be less than myself for anyone and accept the consequences. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm guessing that kind of resolve and acceptance is unusual.

It has another consequence. When you are resigned to ostracism, you are also very grateful for anyone who doesn't care you're bright. Sometimes, too grateful and too accepting, even if that attention is self-serving, using, or otherwise destructive. I've got a whole marriage to prove it. But that's another story.

Grouping social misfits together doesn't make them adept. Socially stunted people don't suddenly gain acumen by being grouped together. There's something to be said for like minds and not feeling alone (provided that's the reaction of your particular gifted individual in a group of other gifted children), but it doesn't mean that it solves all the problems. It may even emphasize and reinforce some notions and antisocial tendencies which might be most prevalent like individual pursuits, strictly electronic socializing or considering those that aren't bright the same way "lesser beings." Which is one reason why MENSA has never held any interest for me.

Reinforcing intellectualism to the exclusion of all else. What do Math Club students do when they throw a party? Go bowling? Well, if they're smart, they might. Too much time in front of a computer screen (guilty!) and the solution to everything is on the internet. Books, games, friends, social interaction, shopping, entertainment. When I was going to school, I was supposed to take four years each of English, math, science, history, foreign language. And do the required classes, a quick glance will show you that doesn't leave much time for something fun or creative or entertaining or inspiring like art or choir or drama, speech. I love to sing, but I never sang in class until college and even there I had to take it for no credit hours because my calendar was already full. Other interests, besides just books and school, are healthy and not just for the body. Burn out is a real risk when all you think life is a series of word problems or you never come outside of the work and the artificial worlds other people have created. It's hard to find something passionate about your life if you're just working and not living.

I think it also tends to focus people on what they do as a definition of who they are instead of, well, who they are. I'm an engineer or a writer or a pick-your-label-here. I get a black belt in Tai Kwon Do and crochet a few baby blankets for friends, and I might start to realize I have more going for me than just my brain. And, once I see myself as a three dimensional person, others might as well.

Real world isn't stratified. I mean, it can be if you're a research physicist or something, but most people living in communities that have a mixture of all types of people. Either you will have no friends (except on line) or you will have to learn to learn to interact usefully with people of all intellectual levels. Going through school without understanding that can lead to a very jarring realization after the fact.

I'm not sure if that's all of it. It might be. It's long enough for today and just gives you some perspective, hopefully, on why I don't think the question or the answer is black and white.

My husband, who doesn't have a high school diploma but still routinely gets 20 points higher on IQ tests, wanted me to add two things.

The problem won't go away until society as a whole stops vilifying people for being bright, being expert and thoughtful. As long as the suspicion of all things unfathomable is part and parcel (and that plays into teachers and parents, too) of society, bright kids will always have a tough road.

The second part is that the US emphasis on measurable metrics (i.e. testing) will continue to marginalize and adversely affect those that think in original ways. School will continue to bore the pants off children at every level unless their intellects are challenged and that means more than teaching kids to take tests. That means teaching critical thinking and fostering creativity and imagination.

Having It Easy Ain't Easy Part 2

2010-12-10T14:49:00.003-06:00

Last time I talked about some of the reasons why "having it easy" makes having friends difficult. There are more reasons but the others are also tied to what I alluded to was the other issue here: the stunted or off-nominal social/emotional growth often found with a "genius." I'm considering these factors have to do with both.

Dispassion. The same capacity for honest evaluation required to excel at anything—anything!—is frequently tied to a sense of dispassion. Even someone who is passionate about, say, dance, passionate about excelling, has to look at his own performance dispassionately for improvement or he will never be great. Dispassion is great for excellence but sucks for interpersonal relationships. Passion, for the dispassionate, can be confusing and seem perverse. The objectivity built into the genius frequently leaves him unable to cope, not only with the passionate resentment of others, but with extreme emotional responses of any kind.

He may try to counter emotional responses or motives with reason and be genuinely confused when it fails. He may try to understand the emotional responses using logic and decide that all unfathomable emotional responses are, by definition, stupid. I don't think I really have to work too hard to explain why this would not do much to reconcile a genius with his peers.

But it can do more than widen the gap. It can also be self-limiting. Dispassion in some aspects, and a reliance on logic for everything, can severely limit emotional relationships with anyone, or emotional reactions. Dispassionate excellence is only intellectually satisfying. Do it often enough, and it's not even that (Straight A's isn't thrilling if that's all you ever get). Passion adds meaning to life, interest, color, purpose. Having none came make life colorless, bland and unappealing.

People have emotions, even the genius types. If people begin to distrust emotional reactions on principal, they stand to either squelch/revile their own emotions (which makes a fulfilling life just that much harder to attain) or they feel no responsibility for them whatsoever, no handle on control or limiting them. Which means their natural emotional reactions are out of control, unhinged.

Perhaps I could have saved myself from several paragraphs of explanation by just saying dispassion adds distance, whether it's with others or within one's own life.

Expectations. This is a big one. It plays a part in social ostracism—people expect geniuses to be unpopular and behave a certain way, even if it's not true—but it also plays heavily into a child's development. For instance, an intelligent logical child might be expected to excel at math, but, because they can't spatially envision three dimensions, they become stymied by geometry. The censure (both self-inflicted and by teachers/peers/parents) can be far more severe than that for someone "normal" who had the same problem. My husband, like many dyslexics, was very articulate at an early age. When writing began in school, he went a considerable time being told he was lazy, he wasn't trying, that he was unmotivated, when the problem was very specific. Their expectation of his brilliance (which was valid - his IQ is almost off the scale) led them to expect he could do anything language related (which was not valid) and a presumption, if he didn't, that it was willful.

Expectations, even within a field of excellence, can also be unrealistic as children and adults continue to push the bar up, only to find no satisfaction but rather even more egregious demands. Parents planning to live their dreams vicariously through their children are notorious in this aspect. Coincidentally, expectations in a particular field may also be for a particular kind of result, one that may be at odds, particularly for a creative genius. The genius can readily become frustrated at always being asked to provide Y, which he finds limiting, or gets criticized for providing something that doesn't fit neatly into a box, even though that creativity is part and parcel with genius.

One of the most devastating ways expectations can adversely affect a genius is by parents/mentors confusing their smarts with maturity. Parents of a gifted child (and teachers) can often feel emotionally distant (see dispassion) and assume their child really doesn't need nurturing, emotional support, love. Not so. It is quite possible that a gifted child won't know to ask for nurturing and support—how would she know?—or might not even realize she was lonely or lacking because she's never known any different. The parent assumes, because the child might not be demonstrative, that the child needs no demonstrations of care or concern. A parent might even be put off by that perception and make it self-fulfilling.

That same sort of thing, expecting a gifted child to be effectively an adult, is also carried forward in other ways, where a parent expects judgment or adult-level dedication from someone who is still a child. Logic does not take the place of experience in many ways and the emotional challenges a gifted child might have actually makes them less likely to address an emotional or social dilemma effectively, not more. Too often, and we see this with prodigies in music and athletics frequently, the parent expects devotion to the art, judgment, skill, self-control to just be part and parcel of the gift, instead of something that must be developed. And that is frequently not the case.

Ironically, the same people (parents, the occasional teacher) who expect them to have the dedication, work ethic and judgment of an adult are frequently the same people who seem determined to control every aspect of their child's life, dismissing what a child might want (or need) over what's "good for them." It's a conundrum that, even now, I can't wrap my mind around, yet I've seen it played out time and time again. Children, forced to take adult-sized responsibilities and meet adult-sized expectations, but given no autonomy or control over their own destiny. That is one resounding recipe for a screwed-up kid.

All work and no play. When my daughter was born, I had a very disheartening realization. I did not know how to play. I couldn't recall playing (though I had a vivid imagination), not with dolls or games or anything except as an indulgence to my siblings or others. This concerned me because I understood, intellectually, how important play is to the development of children. Fortunately, my second husband is a professional-quality player and helped me learn the basics and provided play for my children. Maybe too much, but that's a different story.

My point is that play is often overlooked while people are "nurturing" genius. And that's bad. Play is a great method of social interaction, where one's talents or brains aren't necessarily a handicap. There are many aspects and types of play that are cooperative rather than competitive. Play is a great way to foster creativity and give the mind a break from constant overuse. Play can be a good place to learn some of those emotional responses in a relatively safe environment, even develop some passions. Play is a good place to learn about other aspects of life, beyond books or one's special bailiwick, hobbies, outlets, pastimes that can help fill an otherwise dreary life. Too much of one thing is pretty darn limiting and sometimes unfulfilling.

Cynicism. One of the real risks to being a genius is becoming cynical. As you become dismissive of the passions and emotional railings of others, you can't help but notice how many people want to use your skills or make you look bad so they can look better. It's very easy, especially if you've had limited emotional connection with others, to ascribe the worst to the motivations of others and/or see the world as collection of users.

It's not just the expectations (which can quickly escalate into the absurd), but also the sense that you are just a tool, with no value other than what you can do. If the people around you are primarily focused on what you are (Genius, Prima Ballerina, Quarterback), it's challenging to see yourself in any other terms or to think that you have any value as an individual. It's not much of a step from that to begin looking at others the same way, as means to an end, as tools, as things. It's dehumanizing. I have actually been called "a machine" on performance evaluations. It sounds like a compliment (in terms of performance) but it's a far cry from being seen as an individual.

Self-reliance. Self-reliance is good, right? Ah, all things in moderation, grasshopper. Learning to depend on yourself rather than others is something all children (not just the gifted ones) should learn to do. Gifted kids are often called upon to do so early (see "Expectations") and more extensively than other children because, in large part, of the expectation of maturity (whether or not they are also being controlled). Combine that with a sense of cynicism (most people just want to use me anyway) and the belief (whether real or perceived) that someone can only accomplish things if he does them himself, and you have a perfectionist control freak.

This has many issues associated with it, not the least of which is an inability to ask for help when needed, whether with a project, or in the larger world. Any failure, even if the task was impossible, is taken as a personal failing and the results can be collapse, despair, suicide, depression, pick one. It is unreasonable that one can always handle whatever is tossed at one, no matter how capable. A bright star on her way to glory at a dizzyingly young age can be completely sidetracked by an unexpected pregnancy. And clueless how to deal with it. A man with everything to live for who has the world in his hand can find it gone in a flash with kid's diagnosis of leukemia. No one of can control every aspect of our lives (God, can you think how boring it would be if we could?), but there are many of us who leap to take responsibility and shoulder burdens that are more than can be born.

Of course, social ostracism can limit the pool of resources one can draw on, but frequently gifted people don't even turn to the people closest to them, determined to figure out a solution alone. And that, my friends, has done a great deal of damage, especially when they fail.

And that's more than enough for today.

Having It Easy Ain't Easy Part 1

2010-12-09T20:41:00.002-06:00

I told you there were downsides to having it "easy." My first thought is that there are two serious issues. The most obvious one is emotional isolation from other people, which tends to be blamed on either the smarty-pants or the "envious hordes," depending on which group you're in. The other is a potential for a lack of any sort of emotional fulfillment, a stunted emotional growth that can be related to the emotional isolation but also part and parcel of a life that has too few challenges or the wrong kind of challenges.

Note that when I talk about geniuses here, I'm not just talking about people who are book smart (though I do include people who are exceptionally book smart and/or logical - not the same), but also prodigies in music or athletics or a particular academic field, people who make something (if not several somethings) look so easy that it seems they have no troubles at all.

I can't address it all in one post and I also can't seem to get a handle on separating the two. Some of the same factors play a part in both isolation and emotional growth. I won't touch them all and some won't apply and some will to any particular individual. These are the ones I've seen first-hand, factors that increase that isolation and make it hard to fully develop.

Being different. This is the easiest to explain, starts the earliest, lasts the longest. It's also the easiest to overlook because, as people mature, they come up with other rationales to explain why they dislike someone even though being different is really at the core. Smaller children are less reticent about the core differences and words like freak and weirdo are used liberally. But the belief that there is one kind of thinking, one way of doing things that "everyone" should do, is still alive and well even among adults.

Fresh perspectives, new ideas, different ways of doing things, dispassionate evaluation, even genius—all can be readily dismissed along with the people who have them. For children, they're dismissed for no better reason than because they're different. For adults, it's frequently because it "hasn't been tested" or "challenges core values" or "goes against logic" even when the logic challenged is entirely unsound. People like to understand, to know, to feel they have a handle on things. People who don't think the same way, who are not readily comprehended, threaten that and frequently pay the price by being ostracized.

There's also an impact on the genius herself other than ostracism: that sense of no one being like her, no one understanding her viewpoint. It's a very isolating feeling to believe no one in the world sees things like you do. You don't belong anywhere.

Resentment. In this case, resentment is the attitude that it's unfair one person can excel "so easily" when others struggle. Note that this also manifests when dealing with people who succeed through hard work, but it's particularly pronounced when someone excels in a particular challenging field or when someone is academically superior "effortlessly." Busting the curve, making others "look bad"—almost always ascribed to malice—are considered crimes against fellow students, deliberate slaps all because the genius has an unfair advantage. It's difficult to fight because geniuses do have an unfair advantage (someone who understands math instinctively, for instance, does have an unfair advantage over someone who struggles to understand concepts) but the difference is made worse when the system is designed for children to compete against each other.

The problem isn't that it's untrue, at least to an extent. It's that it's no one's fault, either the genius or the kids who feel lessened as a result. Without a convenient target, however, resentful students have no choice but to blame the genius, as if he had anything to do with the advantage other than using it. A genius cannot use his genius to its greatest extent without causing resentment. In fact, once it's been identified, he cannot use it even minimally without resentment. Perhaps at all.

Arrogance. One of the most frequent complaints about genius in any field is arrogance. I won't lie; I suspect most geniuses are arrogant at least in the sense that they're well aware of their capabilities and even their limitations. There are also, any number of truly arrogant geniuses, in the sense that they feel their genius in whatever field proves that they actually are smarter and superior to the insignificant flotsam around them. It may not look like it from the outside, but there is a difference.

Don't get me wrong. Both can be tough to swallow from the outside. People who know what they can do and do it generally look good, even when they have notable limitations, largely because they're aware of them and steer clear of them. False modesty serves no dispassionate purpose (outside of relationships with others) and gets in the way of honest self-evaluation. Even the best of geniuses can be dismissive or intolerant of error or slower efforts (despite the effort that might have been exerted) others make. They shoot down ideas that don't make the cut without compunction. They are slower to be impressed with achievement. Part of that may be that they're just not competing with anyone but themselves; part of that might be dispassion that comes with pure logic—more on that later.

Those inflicted with the latter kind of arrogance, however, give the rest of us a bad name. I can kind of see it especially if you excel in a particular field. One can't expect Mozart to sit comfortably back as someone butchers a piece of music on the harpsichord when he could have played it better at the age of five. It is frequently difficult for prima donnas who are truly gifted to working effectively with those that are not so gifted, without being impatient and rude.

Note, however, that you certainly don't have to be truly gifted to be a prima donna. In fact, in my experience, that kind of attitude is almost inversely proportion to the amount of talent someone has (with some exceptions). If I find someone like this, he is usually either a true genius in some very narrow field who mistakingly thinks that makes him a genius in everything. (Not so!) or she is a person who consider herself a great deal more smart/talented than she actually is. In my experience, people most often jumping to the forefront to trumpet their intelligence are the ones whose intelligence is, at most, moderately high. People who are truly brilliant don't need to tell anyone. Many wish they were better at hiding it.

There are a significant number of geniuses (most of the ones I know) who are well aware of their abilities, yet don't treat people like crap. Part of that is because no one is good at everything. If you're smart enough to see this, you're smart enough to realize others have strengths and weaknesses, too, that they're not lesser, just different. They go out of their way to understand that strengths in those around them and are the types most likely to work well with others.

Sometimes, the arrogance is a direct result of the ostracism, a defense mechanism to defend a sense of self-worth in a critical world. Focusing on what one can do and telling yourself everyone else is jealous may be all one has to avoid a sense of worthlessness. This arrogance/impatience on the part of the genius undoubtedly contributes to their emotional isolation from others, something they do that makes their ostracism more pronounced. It's an ugly cycle made worse by . . .

The perception of arrogance. One of the most frustrating things about being on the genius side of things is that just acting normally is considered an act of arrogance. This goes hand in hand with the resentment described previously. Speaking using complete sentences, good diction and vocabulary becomes a calculated slur on those around one. Performing well on a test, getting a difficult task completed handily, correcting other people's problems, finding problems that didn't exist—just doing a job right can be viewed as an insult to everyone else, everyone who didn't do so.

For folks who are looking for arrogance, there's no distinction made between knowing one's own worth and thinking one's god's gift to the world of whatever. Short of playing dumb or completely hiding one's gifts, you can't win with this sort. They will see arrogance in everything, especially if they are the ones being corrected or overruled. However, even among the more tolerantly minded, the ones who might appreciate the notion that someone is intelligent, there is still a lingering sense of "less" when confronted with someone who sounds superior in some way. If a genius, unwittingly or no, makes someone feel inferior, especially repeatedly, it's only a small step in logic to deduce the effect was intentional.

Defenses. One cannot stress enough how challenging this ostracism can be on a genius, even among others of "his own kind"—the hierarchy is often less forgiving among geniuses and intellectual achievement does not equate to emotional maturity (which I'll go into in a later post). For some, the isolation is completely debilitating and they grow up emotionally crippled, either leading to lifelong psychological issues or overwhelming arrogance bordering on sociopathy. For others, it's just painful, one of the prices of excellence.

Some choose to hide their abilities or distract from them. They become class clowns with witty comebacks and negligent study habits (which may still not protect them from good grades, but might distract). I've seen several very bright boys go down this path.

Another frequent defense mechanism is playing dumb, way dumb, in fact. I'm sad to say, I see girls do this more than anyone, though I hear that it's also common among some minority groups. There's many women who have felt under particularly intense pressure to pretend an ignorance they didn't have or face near complete isolation. I find that ineffably sad, especially as my daughter is one of them. I can't tell you how painful it is for me to see my sharp quick-thinking daughter turn into a trash-talking moron whenever in the company of a "friend," even though I know how painful her isolation was for her her first few years of school. There is always a price and many a girl who spends her life playing dumb eventually discovers its no longer an act, her abilities and knowledge leeched away through misuse.

There's more features, many of which contribute both to isolation and to emotional challenges for geniuses, but I'll leave that for next time

Still Working on It

2010-12-08T20:58:00.002-06:00

It is much easier to just sit and write Dylan Chroz than it is to sit here and write about what it's like to be "the smart one" or some type of child prodigy. I am working on it because I think it's actually important, but it's harder than I expected and I have to come to grip with things I tend to set aside and work past.

I accepted being unpopular as being part of being myself, since I wasn't willing to act like someone else. But there is always a price. I hadn't appreciated how much there was to it, how complicated and interwoven it was until I tried to put it together. How much my first marriage was tied to it.

I'm not sure everyone gets to decide if they accept it (some are unable to play a role). I know a lot of genius types do put on a persona not realizing that there's a price for that, too.

Bear with me.