My Agent Told Me To Make A Blog

Writers are quirky, hermit-like creatures who talk weirdly and follow trains of thought off cliffs. I think we would all admit this. It's interesting, however, to see how writers are depicted in film. Some writer-characters are hilariously accurate, with constant drafting, throwing out those drafts, and being "almost" done forever. Also with the "this is totally for my writing" excuse for literally every bizarre thing they/we do. But I want to zero in on a specific characteristic I noticed that irks me: when we get examples of how amazing their writing is, it's ridiculous. This may step on the toes of the "literary is the only quality writing" debate, but sometimes I feel like these script-writers haven't heard the other side of that argument. Because every example of a character's "great" writing is... the most over-the-top, flowery, metaphorical purple prose you've ever seen. I'm sure I'm overgeneralizing; I do t...

I've come to find myself repeating one concept over and over. We talk about it every week at writing group. It comes up all the time on critiquing websites. I even have to tell myself from time to time. Based on the results, I'm starting to think this may be the secret ingredient: When writers are bored of their own stories, it's almost always due to a lack of conflict or tension. There may be some. In fact, there's usually some. But in brainstorming, and editing, and critiquing, and discussing, problem-solving always comes back to this. There needs to be enough to propel a whole scene. What really doesn't work, I've found, is "this scene has to be there so we understand x." There lies the path to characters going through the motions. Dialogue that informs us of something, but has no oomph; scenes that are pretty and realistic, but seem to drag; low-level tension that lacks the sizzle you expect. I'll bet you've read scenes like that, and...

As a reader, I always was, and still am, fairly oblivious to the behind-the-scenes magic tricks authors use. Even now that I've seen the ropes and gears, I can get swept up and forget about them. That's the magic of reading, really. You know it's not real, but you believe in it anyway. Or rather, you suspend your disbelief, as they say. Learning the craft of writing is essentially learning how to maintain that suspension of disbelief for the reader. You can have a dragon division to the airforce or make stars explode or give someone the ability to phase through walls, yet it feels like it could be real--like those people might be out there somewhere, battling with those decisions and living with those consequences. There's a big bag of tricks we use in writing, in how information is delivered, which things we direct attention to, even the nuts and bolts of line breaks and scene breaks. In the end, I'd say it all comes down to keeping the reader gripped. However,...

Recently I was reading a book that made me pause and think about societal norms of right and wrong. The situation in the story was that character 1 was very upset that character 2 (their bodyguard) had spied on them without their consent. Character 2 had placed a video bug in the interest of better protecting his charge. Character 1 was pissed, and it wasn't explored beyond "he's mad that I spied on him." This made me realize... I didn't have sympathy for character 1, because I felt character 2 was in the right. The author seems to have assumed the reader would be on-board, and so the "just cuz" explanation would suffice. Assuming that isn't necessarily wrong; I don't think an author needs to go out of their way to explain why someone would be upset over theft, slavery, or murder. But more ambiguous ideals, where there's no physical harm or infringement of rights, are more culturally determined. As an example, if character 3 was presented...

I'm sorry for missing my post last week. I'd like to blame it on a scheduling snafoo or some dramatic emergency at work, but the truth is I just plain didn't do it. I didn't feel like writing because my husband flew off to China for work that morning, which is something he does every few months. He'll be gone for one or two weeks, and theoretically the quiet evenings would be the perfect time to get tons of writing done. The reality is that my routine gets so disrupted, I spend the entire time moping, eating junk food, and watching Grey's Anatomy. As cliche as it is, I can't sleep well when he's not here, because the bed is big and empty and we don't watch our shows together at night--and by the end of the week I'm sleep-deprived and running on fumes. This got me thinking about how much my relationship with my husband influences my writing. There's the real-life stuff (how he affects the daily routine, his role in idea-generation and prob...

I find it's often assumed that, because I so cheerfully critique my favorite things into mangled corpses, I therefore look down on romantic comedies. Friends might engage me in a conversation about how silly and formulaic they are, naturally thinking Mrs. Must-Have-A-Clever-Plot-And-World over here will agree. But I'm actually all, "...I liked that movie". I think this gets into why the romance genre, with a capital R, is so distinct and separate from other genre fiction. You read it (or in my case, watch it) for separate reasons. Regular sci-fi/fantasy--yes, I want to be wowed by how clever and unpredictable and unique everything is. Romance? I just want to be happy and not think about life :( It fills a similar niche to eating cookies. When my husband is off in China for work, and I'm all alone and my brain is exhausted from the day, sometimes all I want out of my fiction is to cheer the main characters on and know they'll get together in the end. (As an...

I find the concept of good and evil overly simplistic. I'm not going to say I automatically hate it. That would rule out so much great fiction, like Lord of the Rings , Star Wars, and Supernatural.    Oh yeah and that really good season of Constantine that went the way of Firefly. Anyway, a lot of the good vs evil thing comes from religion, and fiction based on religious mythology is naturally going to incorporate it (such as the aforementioned Constantine or Supernatural , also Stargate SG-1 , come to think of it). Some of the really great classics also handle it tactfully, because they're giants and founding fathers of their genre (LOTR and Star Wars ). However, in more contemporary, non-Biblical fiction, I think the idea of good vs evil is starting to get stale. As fiction and literature evolves, we're more and more interested in shades of gray, moral ambiguity, antiheroes, ethical quandaries, and unclear or sympathetic villains. The bad guy who's a ...

If you are a writer without a writing group, go get one now. I have peers who go to regular face-to-face groups, and I was forever jealous of them. Online critiquing is advantageous because you can more easily find writing partners who match your tastes and skill level, as opposed to whomever is geographically close. That's where the magic of voice conferencing comes into play! Here's my suggestion: meet your perfect writing partners online through critiquing websites, then create your own face-to-face-at-a-distance group! My writing group took a bit of doing to get off the ground. It started with me and one other person occasionally brainstorming over Skype. We then invited another and had a few haphazard discussion meetings, which petered out as we got busy. Finally, we invited a fourth person to round us out, and I decided to put my foot down and make us a schedule. Now, we meet every Sunday at a designated time (which took some figuring out, between the US, Canada, Sw...

Can I talk about one of my pet peeves? I have a lot of pet peeves when it comes to writing. This one, unfortunately, pops up a lot, because it's something that tends to happen in the opening paragraphs of a story. What am I talking about? The awkward, self-aware, overly vibrant description of a character's eyes and hair. Nothing says amateur hour to me like seeing one of these shoehorned into the first three paragraphs There you are, getting interested in the plot, reading some dialogue, wondering what that explosion was--when some random sentence appears where the character focuses her icy sapphire eyes onto the object of her attention, and brushes a wayward strand of straight black hair out of her face. It's always the hair and eyes, too. Never an earring, a freckle, or a double chin. Some authors place tremendous importance on the color of hair and eyes, and the reader absolutely must know right away so we can be sure to picture the right thing dammit.  I have abou...

What's the most important thing you learned about writing last year? Whether it's about writing in general, your own personal method, or even some small piece of advice that wound up being tremendously helpful. I learned heaps last year, and I think that's true for every year. Let's face it, there's a lot to learn about writing, and it doesn't stop! I think I know what I'm going to pick. I certainly became more familiar with the industry, elements of good queries, how to format a MS, and how to research agents. Technique-wise, I started coming to terms with the fact that I'm not much of an outliner . Content-wise, I discovered that tons of agents and publishers are actually really interested in more diversity, and my tendency for LGBT leads isn't a hindrance but, in fact, a positive. But honestly, the thing that made the biggest difference, the most memorable eureka moment, was what I expressed in my post about the difference in critques betwee...

Anyone who's ever had their writing critiqued knows that critiquers come with varying skill levels and focus on differing story aspects. But holy moly is there ever a difference between industry professionals and amateurs. First, let's talk a little bit about critiques in general, for a basis. 1. The Reactive Critique Anyone, regardless of skill level, can provide excellent feedback in the form of "this is how I felt while reading." Points of confusion, boredom, what they were looking forward to, what they thought would or wouldn't happen. Honestly this is generally the most helpful kind of critique, and requires absolutely no knowledge of writing technique or experience with critiquing. 2. The Suggestive Critique This is where we see huge differences in critiquers, largely due to the subjectivity of writing and reading. When people take that step from "this is how I felt" to "this is how I think you could fix it," that can lead to won...

Continuing on the saga of how I wound up with a blog titled "my agent told me to make a blog," I've talked so far about opening my eyes to the world of writing, getting my feet wet with critique, and developing a writing "family." Then there's the actual writing part. So far, I only have one brave manuscript that's made the whole journey. There's another one or two in the incubator, but Mr. Debut Novel was the one that went through all the growing pains. I think I've been working on this book for... four years? Or something like that. I know it's not as dramatic sounding as the stories people have been fussing over for twenty years, but it feels like ages to me, okay! I know for a fact that future novels will not take as long, because poor Debut Novel was the one that tripped over every pothole and landed in the ditch at every sharp turn. Thanks to all its bruises, I'm now a little more in control of the wheel. I mentioned before tha...

I previously discussed joining writing forums and critique groups as a means to becoming a better writer. This started me on the path of training my inner editor and looking at writing critically. It had the side-effect of meeting many other writers, and most importantly, people who write things I really like. There's a lot of trial and error with establishing critique partners. Critique Circle has "public" queues for you to meet strangers (as opposed to the private queues, where you invite your established buddies to look over specific work). In general, online resources are fantastic for this because you can look for people who write in your own genre, or with a style to your taste. A face-to-face critique group is geographically limited, and usually you're stuck with whatever tastes and genres the other handful of writers have. And boy, not every potential critique relationship works out, so it's nice not being stuck with the same group of people. I'v...

Last time , I talked about my early writing days of clueless, aimless, ignorant nonsense. Back before I even thought of the writing industry as an industry, before I knew the difference between an agent and a publisher, and when I carried over my childhood writing hobby into adulthood. The key ingredient that allowed me to pupate from wee baby author into proper professional author was: critique. Brandon Sanderson's creative writing videos on Youtube were put up and managed by the website Write About Dragons , so naturally I wandered over there and discovered some helpful blog posts. One person there directed aspiring authors to check out Critique Circle , so I did. And if you don't mind me getting overly dramatic on you, that changed my life. That's really where I found my footing, learned what was what, and got launched in the direction of professional writing. I have checked out other writing sites, and none of them fit me as well as CC. Some are too unprofessional, ...

In the past two blog posts , I talked about characters vs real people--how on one hand, characters generally need to be more predictable and consistent, but on the other hand, it sucks when they're so simplified they turn into caricatures. Today I have some examples for you. These aren't necessarily my all-time favorite characters, just a selection of those that feel, in my opinion, well-rounded and "real." Classic Literature Chief from One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest - It's a great book, and a lot of that has to do with the two main characters. Our narrator, Chief, is fascinating. He pretends to be dumb and stupid, and is therefore able to observe a ton about the characters around him. He's part Native American and has a full life and backstory before he came to the mental hospital, and one of the best parts is how his paranoid schizophrenia slips in to create an unreliable narrator. He's a multi-faceted, layered character, who shows us--the read...

Last time , I observed how characters are expected to be more predictable and consistent than people are in real life. It turns into a bit of a balancing act, because if there's anything worse than a confusingly erratic character, it's one who's so simple, they can be defined by a single word/phrase/role. This is a very common topic on what makes good writing. Characters being flat or well-rounded is a huge area for critique/praise/discussion in books and book reviews. Generally, you know a character's flat when they're nothing more than their role: "the love interest;" "the wise mentor;" "the plucky thief." I mentioned how complex and surprising people can be in my experiences with vet clients , and brought up that same idea: character first, role second. A good example is me! The whole reason I thought of this post is how surprised someone was one day when I wore a dress. People are often surprised when I wear a dress or skirt, ...

In vet school, they taught us some basics about communication and how to get through a consult. A minor part of that was a mention of paralanguage. Paralanguage; noun the nonlexical component of communication by speech, for example intonation, pitch and speed of speaking, hesitation noises, gesture, and facial expression.  In vet exam rooms, the idea is how you portray yourself. Acting interested, engaged, sympathetic, professional. Interestingly, I find paralanguage exists in writing, too. Obviously, in writing, you don't have speed, intonation, or pitch. But the more I critique, the more I find the author's attitude and personality makes it onto the page.  "Speed of speaking" comes through as sentence length and paragraph breaks. "Intonation" comes through with choices of punctuation. Even more subtly, sometimes it shows when an author is confident or knowledgeable--or not. I've read manuscripts from friends who are always self-guessing th...

Now, don't get me wrong, I love Star Trek--especially Deep Space 9. I feel no need to pick sides here, even though I know the DS9 and B5 fandoms have had some, uh, friction . But in my mind, what's better than one amazing sci-fi drama set on a space station? Two amazing sci-fi dramas set on space stations! I suppose if you really, really pushed me to answer as accurately as possible, I'd say Star Trek: TNG is the all-time greatest sci-fi series, and I think a lot of that has to do with its cultural influence and the precedents it set. Babylon 5 , sadly, didn't reach nearly that level of widespread awareness and acclaim. Which is why I'm here to tell you about it today. On first viewing, Babylon 5 looks like a hokey, low-budget rip-off of DS9. I remember, several episodes into season 1, I was wondering what the big deal was about the show, and consulted the internet for reviews. It was okay , I thought, but it wasn't exactly as ground-breaking as I'd be...

First chapters are like first dates. Writing communities like to argue a lot about what does or doesn't belong in a first line, a first paragraph, a first page. There's debate over description versus action, establishment of POV, how much information to give away. We try to quantify what, exactly, a “hook” is, and when we need it by. We spend hours crafting that first sentence, and get into arguments on whether or not it’s okay to start with dialogue. Out of all the discussions and ponderings, I think we can safely extract an underlying theme that holds true regardless of genre or style: first chapters make promises for the rest of the novel. When you pick up a book from a new author, even if it’s been recommended to you, they haven’t established your trust. It’s a lot like a first date (a blind date if a friend told you to read it). Just as you’ll develop your opinion of your date based on their conduct, mannerisms, and common courtesy, the first chapter of this n...

My writing origins fit the typical pattern. I can't say I've ever not been writing. My mom likes to tell people how she has the first "book" I wrote when I was three. I still have an excellent illustrated saga about an Octapoos navigating the trials of marine social life, which I even stapled together and fashioned a cover for. It doesn't stop there. All through primary school, I wrote during reading time, a fact that irritated some teachers, while others humored me. It became a solid hobby through high school and college. For some reason, I never thought about it so directly or explicitly as I do now, even though it was always a part of my life. I didn't have goals or milestones, I just wrote when I felt like it, and spent the time in between daydreaming up stories. When I try to think back, I honestly can't remember how much writing I would do in an average week. In the middle of vet school, I stumbled upon Brandon Sanderson's free online lecture...