Josi S. Kilpack
I'm in the middle of the first draft of a book and I was wondering if there were any general norms to paragraph length. All I can find is "don't make them too long" and "vary the length". Is there any more I should know?
*Typically a single paragraph should be committed to a single idea, when the idea transitions to another idea, end the paragraph and start another one. The single idea is relayed to readers by collecting sentences together, thus making the 'paragraph'.
*Paragraphs can be anywhere from one sentence, to infinite sentences (or what feels that way anyhow--chances are the reader won't finish anyway, so it will always be without end).
*Typically paragraphs are between four and eight sentences.
*Varying the length of sentences keeps your writing flowing easily, especially in regard to prose. Be careful about using the same type of sentence (complex, three word, beginning with a pronoun) over and over again, this often bores your reader and sounds repetitive.
*Signal the start of a new paragraph by indenting the first line (in the formatting menu of your Word processing program you should be able to choose this as a default so that whenever you manually return, the next line indents)
*When writing dialogue, each character gets a new paragraph when it's their turn to participate.
( I had an example, but I can't get the formatting to work in blogger, thus I put a # in the following block that shows where a hard return should be. The line following the hard return would then be indented 5 spaces. Notice how hard it is to follow the conversation when it is not broken into paragraphs)
"Don't eat the cheese!" she yelled.# He looked at the cheese, picked it up and stuffed it in his mouth. "I an ef I ant!" he said with his mouth full, giving her a challenging look. #"It was spiked with botulism, you'll be dead within twenty four hours, you idiot," she retorted. If he would just once listen to her, he'd have a long and happy life. But, well, as she'd just told him, he was an idiot. Idiots tended to die young whether or not they ate botulism tainted cheeses. #He swallowed and looked back at the cheese tray, fear in his eyes and beads of sweat forming on his forehead. "Botulism?" he asked, looking a little green. "Why is the cheese tainted with botulism?" # "I don't think the why matters any more, does it?" She hoped his funeral wouldn't take place on Saturday, she had a hair appointment that day and didn't want to miss it.
And all of this brings me to my personal opinion on paragraphs; paragraphs are good. Use them. I rarely have more than 9 sentences in a paragraph specifically because when a reader opens a book, seeing a solid block of text is daunting. I'm a reader and I can verify that this is true for me. I get lost when I move from the end of one line to the start of another line and the paragraph often SHOULD be broken into more paragraphs because it is rarely a single idea when it goes on that long. I have been known to put a book down when entire pages are taken up by one or two paragraphs. They remind me of a drawbridge of a castle, pulled up to prohibit entry. I often can't see past them and determine that the book is not worth my time.
I also love single line paragraphs, they are a great resource when trying to emphasize something. Such as:
. . . blah, blah, blah, blah, blah you better take out the garbage.
I didn't take it out.
The next morning I found the kitchen garbage poured into the front seat of my car. Apparently, she'd cracked a few eggs into it for good measure. Dang, I hate that woman. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. . . .
However, single sentence paragraphs only work if you use them the right way and don't over do it. Typically, your paragraphs should be 4-6 sentences long, using both complex and simple sentences, even a single word sentence works from time to time. Varying your sentences keeps your words flowing and your momentum up.
It's my belief that paragraphs are as much visual as they are semantic. The words need power, but the visual absorption of them also need to be pleasing to the eye.
For a little self-exercise go to your current WIP, go to 'edit' and 'select all' this will highlight your text. Back up from your screen--what do you see? What kind of white-space do you see (meaning non-written on paper)? Are the edges jagged at both sides? Or is it blocky and solid looking. (hint: you want airy and jagged)
Happy writing people!
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Annie on What You Know
by Annette Lyon
I've talked about this before: how the old rule, "write what you know" is highly over-rated. (Read my rant about that here.)
In the last week, I got a great laugh when someone else wrote about the same thing in connection with my new release.
Regarding Annie is a blog written by a woman who is a fun writer in her own right. She's got a newspaper column of the same name that you can click over to on her sidebar.
Her blog post from last Friday was a bit of tongue-in-cheek journalism looking at my supposed in-depth experiences that helped shape the book: things like mine explosions, theft, rattlesnakes, 19th century printing presses, and horse training.
None of which I possess any firsthand knowledge of whatsoever.
All of which play important roles in the book.
If I'd clung to the adage of, "Write what you know," I couldn't have written it. Or any of my other books. In this case, I had a fun storyline and great characters, and I knew I could look up what I needed to and ask for additional help from experts. And that's exactly what I did.
Once and for all, toss out, "Write what you know."
Replace it with, "Write what you're willing to learn about," and (as a commenter said in my earlier post on the topic), "Write what you can imagine."
Then look up the rest.
Read Annie's post here.
I've talked about this before: how the old rule, "write what you know" is highly over-rated. (Read my rant about that here.)
In the last week, I got a great laugh when someone else wrote about the same thing in connection with my new release.
Regarding Annie is a blog written by a woman who is a fun writer in her own right. She's got a newspaper column of the same name that you can click over to on her sidebar.
Her blog post from last Friday was a bit of tongue-in-cheek journalism looking at my supposed in-depth experiences that helped shape the book: things like mine explosions, theft, rattlesnakes, 19th century printing presses, and horse training.
None of which I possess any firsthand knowledge of whatsoever.
All of which play important roles in the book.
If I'd clung to the adage of, "Write what you know," I couldn't have written it. Or any of my other books. In this case, I had a fun storyline and great characters, and I knew I could look up what I needed to and ask for additional help from experts. And that's exactly what I did.
Once and for all, toss out, "Write what you know."
Replace it with, "Write what you're willing to learn about," and (as a commenter said in my earlier post on the topic), "Write what you can imagine."
Then look up the rest.
Read Annie's post here.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Just Call Me Hero
By: Julie Wright
Back in college I was engaged to a guy who, whenever he did something that merited a pat on the back, would strike a superman pose and say in a deep melodramatic voice, "Just call me hero!"
I didn't end up calling him hero (or marrying him--I know . . . I'm a fickle female) because there was someone else who deserved the title a little more.
Writing stories is like dating. You've got to weed through your options before you figure out who your hero is. And like dating, the hero you pick is totally dependent on the outcome you desire. So when picking your hero, or protagonist, how do you know who is best suited for the job?
Ask yourself a few questions:
*Who has the most to gain?
*Who has the most to lose?
*Who hurts the most (because let's face it, pain is interesting)
*Who is the character who will most connect to your reader?
*Whose story spans the greater part of the novel?
Knowing the answers to those questions will make it easier to find your protagonist--your story's true hero. In the novel I just completed, I have twin sisters who are separated. Both have compelling stories, both have much to lose and much to gain if the cards are played right. But one sister had enough *more* to lose--she hurt more. I picked the sister who hurt the most.
Because if the hero doesn't hurt, why do we care? And if the hero doesn't hurt, what will they over come to gain them the right to be the hero?
If you feel like your story isn't heading in the right direction, it may just be because you picked the wrong hero, or maybe you picked the right hero, but you didn't hurt them enough, which means they have nothing to lose, and nothing to fight for.
Back in college I was engaged to a guy who, whenever he did something that merited a pat on the back, would strike a superman pose and say in a deep melodramatic voice, "Just call me hero!"
I didn't end up calling him hero (or marrying him--I know . . . I'm a fickle female) because there was someone else who deserved the title a little more.
Writing stories is like dating. You've got to weed through your options before you figure out who your hero is. And like dating, the hero you pick is totally dependent on the outcome you desire. So when picking your hero, or protagonist, how do you know who is best suited for the job?
Ask yourself a few questions:
*Who has the most to gain?
*Who has the most to lose?
*Who hurts the most (because let's face it, pain is interesting)
*Who is the character who will most connect to your reader?
*Whose story spans the greater part of the novel?
Knowing the answers to those questions will make it easier to find your protagonist--your story's true hero. In the novel I just completed, I have twin sisters who are separated. Both have compelling stories, both have much to lose and much to gain if the cards are played right. But one sister had enough *more* to lose--she hurt more. I picked the sister who hurt the most.
Because if the hero doesn't hurt, why do we care? And if the hero doesn't hurt, what will they over come to gain them the right to be the hero?
If you feel like your story isn't heading in the right direction, it may just be because you picked the wrong hero, or maybe you picked the right hero, but you didn't hurt them enough, which means they have nothing to lose, and nothing to fight for.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Ghostwriting--Interview with Lu Ann Staheli
by Heather Moore
One of our senior editors, Lu Ann Staheli, has been working for the past several months on ghostwriting a book. I thought it would be interesting to learn more about this process. Many books are ghostwritten—especially those you see with "celebrity authors". Some ghostwriters are acknowledged inside the pages (i.e. Glenn Beck’s book The Christmas Sweater had two ghostwriters). Others are acknowledged on the cover such as When Hearts Conjoin, by Erin Herrin with Lu Ann Staheli. Today, Lu Ann has joined us to share her journey of writing the story of Herrin family and their conjoined twins who were successfully separated.
1. From a ghostwriter’s standpoint, how do you begin a project like this? Of course, because I live in Utah where the Herrins twins were born, I had heard some of their story on the local news so I was at least familiar with who they were and some of what the girls had gone through in their short lives. When I first heard they were doing a book I thought, “Wow! What a great project. I wish that I could have written it.” As things worked out, the universe must have read my mind because last August I found myself in that very position. I was given a book outline, and few sample chapter pages, but I was told that Erin, the girls’ mother, didn’t feel the tone of what had been written was right. She wanted a more personal story instead of sounding like a magazine article. So I set to work, drafting a single chapter to get a feel for the project, choosing to write the book more like one might write a novel, using a first person narrative voice, and that voice had to be Erin’s. I hadn’t met Erin yet when I wrote that first chapter, but we sent it off to her, she loved it, and we were on our way. I met with her in October just to chat. It was a good experience because I was able to hear her true voice, begin to understand a little more about her, and to see first-hand her interaction and relationship with the girls, their sister Courtney, and her husband, Jake. The boys were not at home the day I visited. After that meeting, the real work began.
2. When creating the chapters and the flow of the book, how did you decide what information to use and what not to use? We didn’t want this book to turn into a medical procedural, yet we knew we had to maintain the story’s reason to be told. Erin wanted to insure that nothing in the book would ever delve too deeply into the girls’ privacy, so I had to weigh the information I discovered against making sure we had an accurate portrail of events, yet keeping the book more about the emotion instead of the medicine. Since we wanted to stay in Erin’s point of view, it was important to only share what she experienced, felt, and understood. There were many times I just tried to put myself in her place as I worked on the draft and let my own emotions and questions surface. The interesting thing was when I sent her the drafts she would often reply, “That’s exactly how I felt!”
3. The mother of the conjoined twins, Erin Herrin, is listed as a co-author. How did the writing relationship work between the both of you? After I met with Erin, I came home and started a draft of the book in earnest. A flurry of emails went back and forth between the two of us, details were added, I did online research to support what I was writing, Erin corrected things I hadn’t gotten quite right, sent me tidbits she had remembered, and answered my million questions, until at last we had it right. Sometimes she and I were online at the same time, so answers came quickly. Other times, I had to just write through a section and wait for her response. That meant I had to do rewrites a little more often on those sections, but as a writer, I think we all understand the need to just get words on the page and worry about revision and researching later.
3. The mother of the conjoined twins, Erin Herrin, is listed as a co-author. How did the writing relationship work between the both of you? After I met with Erin, I came home and started a draft of the book in earnest. A flurry of emails went back and forth between the two of us, details were added, I did online research to support what I was writing, Erin corrected things I hadn’t gotten quite right, sent me tidbits she had remembered, and answered my million questions, until at last we had it right. Sometimes she and I were online at the same time, so answers came quickly. Other times, I had to just write through a section and wait for her response. That meant I had to do rewrites a little more often on those sections, but as a writer, I think we all understand the need to just get words on the page and worry about revision and researching later.
4. What type of research did you find yourself doing to flesh out details? I did a lot of reading about conjoined twins in general, but mostly about Kendra and Maliyah. You’d be amazed at how much is really out there about these two little girls. Jake runs a website for them as well, and I watched several video clips of news reports about their surgery. I found online articles about the girls that even Erin didn’t know were available. I also had to learn about medical procedures and equipment. My husband is an LPN, so I asked him a lot of questions and he was able to explain things to me pretty well. Since I’ve never given birth to a child, I relied on my friends to tell me details about pregnancy, ultrasounds, labor, and nursing. Sometimes I think I heard more than I ever wanted to know.
5. When ghostwriting, what are some of the challenges you faced? And what aspects were easier than you thought? Originally I wanted to tell the story completely in chronological order, but I realized that the hook of this story was the girls, and although the family history played a key role, we needed to start with a dramatic moment, so I had to take their life story and organize it into a plot, just like I would for a novel or screenplay, a process I was already familiar with. I reviewed the chapter outline they had given me, and decided where the real story was found, to insure this didn’t become just a travelogue of events. I worried that Erin wouldn’t agree with me at first, but as the story started to come together and she could review the pages, she relaxed and felt good about where the book was headed. Probably the most difficult thing about this book was that Erin had tried so hard to shut out all the fears and bad memories from the past that she had almost blocked out some of the very details we needed to make this story alive enough to touch the hearts of the readers. Sometimes getting the chronological order just right, or remembering which doctor played what role, or sorting through details was confusing, but we hope anyone who finds an error will forgive us, knowing that revisiting this time in her life and the lives of the girls was not always an easy thing for Erin to do.
6. What types of agreements or contracts were made between you, as the writer, and the Herrin family, as the story source? I was originally approached to do this book as a straight ghost-writer, which means I wouldn’t have had my name on it at all. However, as the book progressed, and as Erin and I got to know each other via email and our in-person meeting, we both came to realize how important it was to work as equals on this project. She couldn’t do the book without me, and I couldn’t write her story without her. Erin’s original contract was with Richard Paul Evans as the publisher, and it’s through his company that all of us are being paid, so we came to an agreement that Erin and I would share the writing credits. The girls have their own share of royalties for their trust fund, so everyone wins. Erin and I have also talked about working together on a screenplay for a movie-of-the week based on the book, so that may come about in the future as well.
7. Most writers don’t have a hard time to write their own books, let alone one for someone else. How did you manage this project with your own personal projects? People often ask me how I manage to do all that I do at any given time. I don’t know. I’m a workaholic? I am always busy on something, and I have a husband who doesn’t mind cleaning house, cooking meals, shopping, and running kids around from this thing to that. (Well, let’s say he doesn’t always mind.) Because I’m an English teacher, there are times when my students are reading or writing that I can too. I don’t watch much television, and I’m usually in my home office for at least a few hours each day. I’ve gotten good at writing fast and using little pieces of time to reach my goals, although sometimes a favorite project gets set aside for something with a more immediate return. As a newspaper columnist, I learned how to write a 500 word piece from scratch to final draft form in under an hour. I’m also great at working on multiple projects at the same time, a talent that certainly came in handy as I wrote When Hearts Conjoin at the same time that I finished the screenplay for Seasons of Salvation.
Thanks, Lu Ann for sharing your ghostwriting journey with us!
Note: When Hearts Conjoin will be out May 2009.
Friday, March 20, 2009
The PERFECT Writing Quote
By Josi S. Kilpack
I love writing quotes and always tell myself I'm going to save them and have hundreds of them to look through at any given time. Sadly, this promise to myself is often lumped into the same category of "I will not eat sugar today" which really means "WHERE'S THE SUGAR!" and "Today, I'm going to do nothing but write." which really means "I'm going to feel bad about not writing, but at least my toilets will be clean." Therefore, I have no document full of writing quotes. But today I am writing and I wanted a quote to inspire me. I considered this one:
Writing is a lonely job, unless you're a drinker, in which case you always have a friend within reach. --Emilio Estivez
Unfortunately, I don't drink, hence I am lonely and this quote makes me feel worse. On to the next option:
For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I have good luck and write better than I can. --Ernest Hemingway
No kidding! But still not exactly what I'm looking for.
And all writing is creating or spinning dreams for other people so they won't have to bother doing it themselves. --Beth Henley
I don't know who Beth is, but now I'm depressed.
A young musician plays scales in his room and only bores his family. A beginning writer, on the other hand, sometimes has the misfortune of getting into print. --Marguerite Yourcenar
Let that further convince you to never read MY first book:
"The ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding." -Francis Bacon
Uh, what? I'm going to have to keep looking. Meanwhile, which of these three best describe you today?
"I think I did pretty well, considering I started out with nothing but a bunch of blank paper." -Steve Martin
"By writing much, one learns to write well." -Robert Southey
"There is no great writing, only great rewriting." -Justice Brandeis
"I have been successful probably because I have always realized that I knew nothing about writing and have merely tried to tell an interesting story entertainingly." -Edgar Rice Burroughs
I love writing quotes and always tell myself I'm going to save them and have hundreds of them to look through at any given time. Sadly, this promise to myself is often lumped into the same category of "I will not eat sugar today" which really means "WHERE'S THE SUGAR!" and "Today, I'm going to do nothing but write." which really means "I'm going to feel bad about not writing, but at least my toilets will be clean." Therefore, I have no document full of writing quotes. But today I am writing and I wanted a quote to inspire me. I considered this one:
Writing is a lonely job, unless you're a drinker, in which case you always have a friend within reach. --Emilio Estivez
Unfortunately, I don't drink, hence I am lonely and this quote makes me feel worse. On to the next option:
For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I have good luck and write better than I can. --Ernest Hemingway
No kidding! But still not exactly what I'm looking for.
And all writing is creating or spinning dreams for other people so they won't have to bother doing it themselves. --Beth Henley
I don't know who Beth is, but now I'm depressed.
A young musician plays scales in his room and only bores his family. A beginning writer, on the other hand, sometimes has the misfortune of getting into print. --Marguerite Yourcenar
Let that further convince you to never read MY first book:
"The ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding." -Francis Bacon
Uh, what? I'm going to have to keep looking. Meanwhile, which of these three best describe you today?
"I think I did pretty well, considering I started out with nothing but a bunch of blank paper." -Steve Martin
"By writing much, one learns to write well." -Robert Southey
"There is no great writing, only great rewriting." -Justice Brandeis
"I have been successful probably because I have always realized that I knew nothing about writing and have merely tried to tell an interesting story entertainingly." -Edgar Rice Burroughs
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Writing Schedules
by Annette Lyon
Sometimes I listen to a great podcast called Writing Excuses, produced with writers Brandon Sanderson, Howard Taylor, and Dan Wells. It's a very helpful podcast with lots of good information, and I recommend listening to it. Some of what they discuss refers specifically to fantasy and science fiction, but most of it is applicable to any genre.
One of the episodes, however, had me snickering and giggling: the one about a writer's schedule.
All three of the guys who are part of the podcast are full-time writers. I suppose they've forgotten what being a part-time writer was like, because they said things like (paraphrasing here):
"If I'm going to get any writing done, I need at least a four-hour block."
I burst out laughing.
Most of my writing career has been spent as a stay-at-home mom with several small children. Finding a four-hour block for writing was something that existed only in the realm of fantasy. Heck, for years, a TWO-hour block was pretty much an impossibility.
I had to find a way to make time, to use small snippets here and there. I learned to think ahead so that when I did have 30 minutes to write, I could type fast and make the most of the short session I had. I got really good at finding pockets of time and using them efficiently.
I wrote several books and sold lots of articles this way.
I imagine the vast majority of writers are in the same boat. They don't have large swaths of time to warm up and get into the mood and wait for the muse to strike. Not if they want to produce anything, anyway.
And that's fine.
Rumor has it that John Grisham worked as a lawyer while writing his first book, a page or so at a time during his 30-minute lunch break. Other now-famous blockbuster writers did the same before they could quit their day jobs.
If writing is a priority, you can find the time, even when a four-block is totally unrealistic.
Some ways:
What can you cut out of your life? Something will have to go, because there are only 24 hours in a day. Maybe it's a hobby. Or TV time (can you skip a sitcom six nights a week? That's THREE hours of writing!). Or it might be something else.
What can you consolidate or do faster? For example, if you ran all your errands on one day instead of spreading them out all week, you might be able to find a little time on a day or two to hit the computer. Maybe you can take the bus to work and write during the commute.
Plan ahead. That means both with finding time and with planning your writing. One small example: if I plan dinner well ahead of schedule (even doing something in the crock pot) then I can save myself half an hour or more that can be spent writing.
Then, if during the day, I thought ahead to what scene I'll write during that half-hour period, I can get right to work and be productive.
When are you sitting around doing nothing? I've written entire scenes in the doctor's office, the dance class lobby, and more. Time otherwise lost to the ether was made productive.
"I want to write, but I just don't have the time," is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Writers don't have time dropped handily into their laps. They MAKE time. They carve it out. They hunt it down, tie it up, and suck out every drop.
One irony: now that my youngest child is in kindergarten and I actually have a regular two-hour block, I find that I'm less productive in small snatches. It's as if my brain has realized it doesn't have to focus and work so hard--it's got two whole hours! Let's relax!
Next year when she's in school all day, I'd better not end up saying I need a four-hour block to get anything done.
If I do, smack me back to reality.
Sometimes I listen to a great podcast called Writing Excuses, produced with writers Brandon Sanderson, Howard Taylor, and Dan Wells. It's a very helpful podcast with lots of good information, and I recommend listening to it. Some of what they discuss refers specifically to fantasy and science fiction, but most of it is applicable to any genre.
One of the episodes, however, had me snickering and giggling: the one about a writer's schedule.
All three of the guys who are part of the podcast are full-time writers. I suppose they've forgotten what being a part-time writer was like, because they said things like (paraphrasing here):
"If I'm going to get any writing done, I need at least a four-hour block."
I burst out laughing.
Most of my writing career has been spent as a stay-at-home mom with several small children. Finding a four-hour block for writing was something that existed only in the realm of fantasy. Heck, for years, a TWO-hour block was pretty much an impossibility.
I had to find a way to make time, to use small snippets here and there. I learned to think ahead so that when I did have 30 minutes to write, I could type fast and make the most of the short session I had. I got really good at finding pockets of time and using them efficiently.
I wrote several books and sold lots of articles this way.
I imagine the vast majority of writers are in the same boat. They don't have large swaths of time to warm up and get into the mood and wait for the muse to strike. Not if they want to produce anything, anyway.
And that's fine.
Rumor has it that John Grisham worked as a lawyer while writing his first book, a page or so at a time during his 30-minute lunch break. Other now-famous blockbuster writers did the same before they could quit their day jobs.
If writing is a priority, you can find the time, even when a four-block is totally unrealistic.
Some ways:
What can you cut out of your life? Something will have to go, because there are only 24 hours in a day. Maybe it's a hobby. Or TV time (can you skip a sitcom six nights a week? That's THREE hours of writing!). Or it might be something else.
What can you consolidate or do faster? For example, if you ran all your errands on one day instead of spreading them out all week, you might be able to find a little time on a day or two to hit the computer. Maybe you can take the bus to work and write during the commute.
Plan ahead. That means both with finding time and with planning your writing. One small example: if I plan dinner well ahead of schedule (even doing something in the crock pot) then I can save myself half an hour or more that can be spent writing.
Then, if during the day, I thought ahead to what scene I'll write during that half-hour period, I can get right to work and be productive.
When are you sitting around doing nothing? I've written entire scenes in the doctor's office, the dance class lobby, and more. Time otherwise lost to the ether was made productive.
"I want to write, but I just don't have the time," is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Writers don't have time dropped handily into their laps. They MAKE time. They carve it out. They hunt it down, tie it up, and suck out every drop.
One irony: now that my youngest child is in kindergarten and I actually have a regular two-hour block, I find that I'm less productive in small snatches. It's as if my brain has realized it doesn't have to focus and work so hard--it's got two whole hours! Let's relax!
Next year when she's in school all day, I'd better not end up saying I need a four-hour block to get anything done.
If I do, smack me back to reality.
Friday, March 13, 2009
When in Doubt: Kill Someone Off
By Josi S. Kilpack
They year is 1999.
The Place is my dining room in my house in Draper, Utah.
The book I'm working on is my first one, Earning Eternity
It happened like this.
I had never written a book before, but had spent the last two months creating this story. I was having a dang good time and loving what I was created, but I'd hit an impasse. I didn't know what came next. I had built conflict, but it wasn't enough. I had great characters, but they weren't enough either. I was faced with that 2/3 sag, where you're not quite ready to end the story, but you're running out of steam. I thought about some of my favorite books, trying to figure out what those authors did. That's when it came to me.
I broke into tears, pushed away from the table and stopped writing for the day. The next day I sat back down, let my fingers hover over the keys and burst into tears again. I couldn't do it. I was a mother, I had a son of my own. I couldn't do it.
Another day passed and I just knew--I just knew that if I didn't do this the book would suffer. To be true to the entire structure of a novel, I had to let my character suffer--REALLY suffer. So I did it. I wrote the car accident that led to the head trauma that led to the death of Kim's son. I cried the whole time.
My husband came home from work and my eyes were red and swollen.
"What happened?"
"Jackson died."
"WHAT?" (Jackson was also the name of a boy in our neighborhood)
"Jackson, in my book, he died."
Husband freezes and looks at me like I'm an alien life form (no worries, I've gotten used to it since then--happens all the time these days) "Huh?"
So I explain it to him; how Jackson's death was necessary, but it broke my heart, and it's just so sad and I'd been really upset about it. I start crying again as I try to explain. He thinks I've truly lost my mind (who's to say I haven't?)
It was my first fictional death, and it hurt to know that I'd done it. And yet, when the book was done I knew that I'd been right--the story did need it. The sacrifice had paid off, never mind the heart ache.
Since then I've become a regular serial killer of characters. Some are important characters, some are just 'props' we don't need anymore. They've died in a myriad of ways, and while I don't usually cry anymore, that's not because it's easy. I don't like random acts of violence any more than the next person, however, in the case of writing a good book-well, there are just times when somebody has to die. Here's why.
Death challenges the deepest fears that we, as humans have. Even those of us with a religious bent worry about death--the mess, the other side, the people left behind. Death is painful on many levels, and that being the case it's a powerful tool of manipulation. That's what we do, you know, we manipulate people into thinking and feeling what we want them to think and feel. Don't try and deny it--you know it's true. And while there are hundreds of ways to create this manipulation of our readers (kissing scenes, rain, tearful goodbyes, vampires that glisten in the sunlight) there are few quite as powerful as death--be it the bad guy getting shot in the head, the hero's lover falling victim to small pox, or, as in my first book, an only child dying as a result of a bad idea gone horribly wrong.
There is also a sense of relief about death that you can't get through other means of character torture--with death you know that that character's life is over, and then the remaining characters need to rebuild without that person. It's a huge 'change' that can then grow new conflicts and direction for your story. Even the bad guy getting what he deserves provides opportunities of reflection and growth. Because death is so difficult, your readers are hungry to see the remaining characters cope and grow because of this adversity, giving you a whole new tool belt of tactics to use for the rest of your story. Bad guys are made worse when they kill someone, and good guys are made gooder when they triumph over such tragedy.
You are likely reading this with one of two reactions--you're either nodding, thinking about some great death scenes you've read or written, or you're thinking I'm a little tipped in the head. Don't feel bad, I'm the last one to say I'm not tipped, but I will say that when I reach those parts of my books where I'm feeling it sag, or I need to get the story started but not sure how to get those first pages in there with enough action to hold my reader, the first thing I do is look around at my characters and see who is dispensable. That's not to say I don't shed a tear now and again--I'm not completely heartless--but you never know when death might be the very thing to save your story.
They year is 1999.
The Place is my dining room in my house in Draper, Utah.
The book I'm working on is my first one, Earning Eternity
It happened like this.
I had never written a book before, but had spent the last two months creating this story. I was having a dang good time and loving what I was created, but I'd hit an impasse. I didn't know what came next. I had built conflict, but it wasn't enough. I had great characters, but they weren't enough either. I was faced with that 2/3 sag, where you're not quite ready to end the story, but you're running out of steam. I thought about some of my favorite books, trying to figure out what those authors did. That's when it came to me.
I broke into tears, pushed away from the table and stopped writing for the day. The next day I sat back down, let my fingers hover over the keys and burst into tears again. I couldn't do it. I was a mother, I had a son of my own. I couldn't do it.
Another day passed and I just knew--I just knew that if I didn't do this the book would suffer. To be true to the entire structure of a novel, I had to let my character suffer--REALLY suffer. So I did it. I wrote the car accident that led to the head trauma that led to the death of Kim's son. I cried the whole time.
My husband came home from work and my eyes were red and swollen.
"What happened?"
"Jackson died."
"WHAT?" (Jackson was also the name of a boy in our neighborhood)
"Jackson, in my book, he died."
Husband freezes and looks at me like I'm an alien life form (no worries, I've gotten used to it since then--happens all the time these days) "Huh?"
So I explain it to him; how Jackson's death was necessary, but it broke my heart, and it's just so sad and I'd been really upset about it. I start crying again as I try to explain. He thinks I've truly lost my mind (who's to say I haven't?)
It was my first fictional death, and it hurt to know that I'd done it. And yet, when the book was done I knew that I'd been right--the story did need it. The sacrifice had paid off, never mind the heart ache.
Since then I've become a regular serial killer of characters. Some are important characters, some are just 'props' we don't need anymore. They've died in a myriad of ways, and while I don't usually cry anymore, that's not because it's easy. I don't like random acts of violence any more than the next person, however, in the case of writing a good book-well, there are just times when somebody has to die. Here's why.
Death challenges the deepest fears that we, as humans have. Even those of us with a religious bent worry about death--the mess, the other side, the people left behind. Death is painful on many levels, and that being the case it's a powerful tool of manipulation. That's what we do, you know, we manipulate people into thinking and feeling what we want them to think and feel. Don't try and deny it--you know it's true. And while there are hundreds of ways to create this manipulation of our readers (kissing scenes, rain, tearful goodbyes, vampires that glisten in the sunlight) there are few quite as powerful as death--be it the bad guy getting shot in the head, the hero's lover falling victim to small pox, or, as in my first book, an only child dying as a result of a bad idea gone horribly wrong.
There is also a sense of relief about death that you can't get through other means of character torture--with death you know that that character's life is over, and then the remaining characters need to rebuild without that person. It's a huge 'change' that can then grow new conflicts and direction for your story. Even the bad guy getting what he deserves provides opportunities of reflection and growth. Because death is so difficult, your readers are hungry to see the remaining characters cope and grow because of this adversity, giving you a whole new tool belt of tactics to use for the rest of your story. Bad guys are made worse when they kill someone, and good guys are made gooder when they triumph over such tragedy.
You are likely reading this with one of two reactions--you're either nodding, thinking about some great death scenes you've read or written, or you're thinking I'm a little tipped in the head. Don't feel bad, I'm the last one to say I'm not tipped, but I will say that when I reach those parts of my books where I'm feeling it sag, or I need to get the story started but not sure how to get those first pages in there with enough action to hold my reader, the first thing I do is look around at my characters and see who is dispensable. That's not to say I don't shed a tear now and again--I'm not completely heartless--but you never know when death might be the very thing to save your story.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The Great Debate: Outline or Discover?
by Annette Lyon
You've likely heard the debate between two basic camps of writers: those who swear by outlining and those who shun it, instead discovering their story organically as they go.
Which is right?
Well, both. And neither.
Outliners swear by the idea that if you think through the entire story from start to finish, you'll be able to write a pretty solid book in your first draft. The story will have a better shape, it won't be directionless, and you won't waste time wandering around and driving into ruts and having to back up. A lot of Outliners say that thanks to detailed outlining, by the time they've finish a first draft of the actual book, it's pretty darn close to the final version.
Discoverers, on the flip side, don't want to be held down by a strict structure. They feel like half the joy in writing is finding out what happens right along with the characters. They do end up with several drafts this way as they find their way, and yes, a lot of what they might be considered a waste of time by Outliners, but they wouldn't have it any other way.
Do you have to pick a camp and set up your writing tent there? The good news is that no, you don't. There aren't just two camps, because the Outliner/Discoverer techniques are really two ends of one big spectrum. Most writers fall somewhere in the middle.
I personally lean just a teeny, tiny bit toward the Outliner side, but I'm pretty close to center.
I can't truly "outline" a book in detail. I tried once, and when I started the actual writing, the story fell flat. I'd already "lived" it, so to speak. The spark was gone.
On the other hand, any time I've gone into a story blind, without a clear idea of where I was heading, it's turned into unstructured mush.
The way I work is first having a clear story concept (what is this book about?). I need to know roughly where the story starts. I need to know where it'll end up. I must know several major landmarks along the way, including the major conflict/s, main characters, and several pivotal scenes.
That's it. I don't necessarily know how I'll get from one landmark to the next. My "outline" is pretty skeletal, but it's there in some form. As I write and "discover" an upcoming scene, I'll add it to the outline, such as it is.
This method is my writing method. Every writer's will be slightly different. The trick is finding what works for you. Let yourself discover where you fall on the spectrum.
Try outlining and see if it works for you. Remember that outlining is a spectrum concept. You don't have to write down every detail. Try different levels of outlines. Maybe you do need an outline--just not one as fleshed out as another writer's would be.
For example, if you don't know how you'll get your characters from scene B to scene C, no worries. Figure that out later. Not knowing the bridges doesn't mean you can't benefit from an outline.
On the other hand, maybe you'd benefit from trying your hand at Discovery writing. Maybe that works for you.
Or maybe you're a mixture of the two styles, falling slightly to one side over the other, like I am.
Try several styles and learn what "clicks."
Wherever you fall, don't let anyone tell you that your way is wrong or inferior. It's just different. It's YOU.
You've likely heard the debate between two basic camps of writers: those who swear by outlining and those who shun it, instead discovering their story organically as they go.
Which is right?
Well, both. And neither.
Outliners swear by the idea that if you think through the entire story from start to finish, you'll be able to write a pretty solid book in your first draft. The story will have a better shape, it won't be directionless, and you won't waste time wandering around and driving into ruts and having to back up. A lot of Outliners say that thanks to detailed outlining, by the time they've finish a first draft of the actual book, it's pretty darn close to the final version.
Discoverers, on the flip side, don't want to be held down by a strict structure. They feel like half the joy in writing is finding out what happens right along with the characters. They do end up with several drafts this way as they find their way, and yes, a lot of what they might be considered a waste of time by Outliners, but they wouldn't have it any other way.
Do you have to pick a camp and set up your writing tent there? The good news is that no, you don't. There aren't just two camps, because the Outliner/Discoverer techniques are really two ends of one big spectrum. Most writers fall somewhere in the middle.
I personally lean just a teeny, tiny bit toward the Outliner side, but I'm pretty close to center.
I can't truly "outline" a book in detail. I tried once, and when I started the actual writing, the story fell flat. I'd already "lived" it, so to speak. The spark was gone.
On the other hand, any time I've gone into a story blind, without a clear idea of where I was heading, it's turned into unstructured mush.
The way I work is first having a clear story concept (what is this book about?). I need to know roughly where the story starts. I need to know where it'll end up. I must know several major landmarks along the way, including the major conflict/s, main characters, and several pivotal scenes.
That's it. I don't necessarily know how I'll get from one landmark to the next. My "outline" is pretty skeletal, but it's there in some form. As I write and "discover" an upcoming scene, I'll add it to the outline, such as it is.
This method is my writing method. Every writer's will be slightly different. The trick is finding what works for you. Let yourself discover where you fall on the spectrum.
Try outlining and see if it works for you. Remember that outlining is a spectrum concept. You don't have to write down every detail. Try different levels of outlines. Maybe you do need an outline--just not one as fleshed out as another writer's would be.
For example, if you don't know how you'll get your characters from scene B to scene C, no worries. Figure that out later. Not knowing the bridges doesn't mean you can't benefit from an outline.
On the other hand, maybe you'd benefit from trying your hand at Discovery writing. Maybe that works for you.
Or maybe you're a mixture of the two styles, falling slightly to one side over the other, like I am.
Try several styles and learn what "clicks."
Wherever you fall, don't let anyone tell you that your way is wrong or inferior. It's just different. It's YOU.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Unexamined Lives
By Julie Wright
Plato said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." From that one could also say that the unlived life is not worth examining. And from that one could also say that a character without a life isn't worth reading.
Life is messy if you're bothering to live it well. It's all fine to live safely, but people who lock themselves into their houses and use antibacterial soap aren't usually the most interesting people out there. If your characters are like these people, your book won't make it past page five (and that's if the reader is generous)
We like to hear about people who are doing things. And we are never bored when our friends call us up to tell us their problems.
This is why your characters should have problems. They should be out doing things. Don't open your book with characters looking at a sunset (unless the sun is rocketing towards earth in a cataclysmic event that will burn us all up within the next 24 hours and the hero has to figure out how to harness the sun and put it back in its own orbit). Don't open your book with characters waking up, having a bowl of cereal, and brushing their teeth. The mundane is synonymous with life unlived. We need action!
And the best action comes from characters solving their own problems. David Gerrold said, "the bigger the problem, the bigger the character has to be to solve it." And if you want to justify telling the story you're telling, you'd better be writing that character and his problem absurdly huge.
Some problems come from a challenge. The character accepts a challenge or takes on a challenge and falls into crisis (think Lord of the Rings).
And your character must go through the try-fail cycle. He'd better go through it a few times (three is what they suggest) This means he tries to overcome his problem and fails, tries to overcome his problem and fails. But the real failure is the guy who doesn't get back up when you knock him down. So your character had better not be that guy. Your character had better be the guy hauling his backside up and shouting, "Is that all you've got?" Your character must win.
Give your characters life by letting them dive into the messy complications of REALLY living. And if you're starting to worry about yourself becoming boring, maybe take on a challenge or two for yourself on your off writing days . . . it'll give you more to write about.
Plato said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." From that one could also say that the unlived life is not worth examining. And from that one could also say that a character without a life isn't worth reading.
Life is messy if you're bothering to live it well. It's all fine to live safely, but people who lock themselves into their houses and use antibacterial soap aren't usually the most interesting people out there. If your characters are like these people, your book won't make it past page five (and that's if the reader is generous)
We like to hear about people who are doing things. And we are never bored when our friends call us up to tell us their problems.
This is why your characters should have problems. They should be out doing things. Don't open your book with characters looking at a sunset (unless the sun is rocketing towards earth in a cataclysmic event that will burn us all up within the next 24 hours and the hero has to figure out how to harness the sun and put it back in its own orbit). Don't open your book with characters waking up, having a bowl of cereal, and brushing their teeth. The mundane is synonymous with life unlived. We need action!
And the best action comes from characters solving their own problems. David Gerrold said, "the bigger the problem, the bigger the character has to be to solve it." And if you want to justify telling the story you're telling, you'd better be writing that character and his problem absurdly huge.
Some problems come from a challenge. The character accepts a challenge or takes on a challenge and falls into crisis (think Lord of the Rings).
And your character must go through the try-fail cycle. He'd better go through it a few times (three is what they suggest) This means he tries to overcome his problem and fails, tries to overcome his problem and fails. But the real failure is the guy who doesn't get back up when you knock him down. So your character had better not be that guy. Your character had better be the guy hauling his backside up and shouting, "Is that all you've got?" Your character must win.
Give your characters life by letting them dive into the messy complications of REALLY living. And if you're starting to worry about yourself becoming boring, maybe take on a challenge or two for yourself on your off writing days . . . it'll give you more to write about.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Observation Exercises
By Josi S. Kilpack
"Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of moonlight on broken glass."
--Anton Pavlovich Chekhov
My father is a teacher of many things artistic--pottery, jewelry making, drawing, oil painting, sculpting, and photography. It's the photography I want to talk about a little bit, and a specific element of photography that I have never heard anyone talk about but my dad. That could very well be due to the fact that my only photography teacher has been my dad, but still :-)
The element is called 'point', and it's rather hard to describe in technical terms. Whereas line and curve and framing are all fairly easy to explain, point is an element that is best shown:
Pepper on a fried egg
A red tomato set within a basket of green peppers
Three black birds sitting on a power line
The steeple of a church
The star on a Christmas tree
The red ornaments on a Christmas tree
Two glowing green eyes peering between stalks of corn on a moonless night
The slight part of a bride's lips just before the groom kisses her
In photography, point is not the main subject, but it's the detail that draws the eye and is often the difference between a nice photo and a photo that you look at a second time. Imagine something as simple as a photo of a fried egg, what exactly does the pepper do for it?
In writing, the word 'point' is often thought of as the moral or the plot or the main conflict. I think that works pretty well--in most cases the 'point' is seen as the main event. I can talk to my kids for half an hour and then say "The point is . . ." effectively summing it up. So, there are definitely interpretations of the word. But for right now I want you to ponder the details of your current Work in Progress, viewing 'point' within the photography definition of the element. I want you to back up and look at the 'points' in your writing. What is it that makes your book different than others? Not in overall things, but in the detail. Things like:
The smell of freshly cut grass that clings to his skin
Highly polished loafers that catch the light of the ballroom
A nervous habit of shaking the coins in his pocket
The amber glints in her otherwise green eyes
The fact that there are two different colors of shingles on the house
A doorbell that plays the first measure of Bethoven's fifth symphony
A doorbell that plays nothing at all
The barking dog just after two a.m.
I promise that you have them--or better yet, I sincerely hope you have them. My favorite books always do. And yet sometimes I look at my own writing and find that those details are missing, that I've become so caught up in the 'Point' of my story that I've forgotten the 'point'--which is to make it real. To bring fiction--unreal; completely made up things--to life. I submit that it's those details that are the difference between good books and great books.
Look around you right now, where ever you happen to be and find point--a detail that draws your eye. It won't be your computer or your desk, but something small, something that almost goes unnoticed.
For me, it's the silver lettering on the spine of a book on my desk that reflects the light of my computer; it looks like christmas lights set inside the cover. Or perhaps it's the orange highlighter wedged between a hundred other writing utensils in my pen holder. Maybe it's the sheen of the light that catches the scotch tape holding a quote to the wall above my desk, or the smudge of black on the side of my printer that I've never gotten around to cleaning.
Take a minute and notice the details, the points, around you. Then find a way to show them in words, to create them for your reader. Doing this type of exercise on a regular basis will not only make you more aware of the world around you, but will likely make your readers more aware of the world you create in your book--and that, after all, is really the point, isn't it?
"Don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of moonlight on broken glass."
--Anton Pavlovich Chekhov
My father is a teacher of many things artistic--pottery, jewelry making, drawing, oil painting, sculpting, and photography. It's the photography I want to talk about a little bit, and a specific element of photography that I have never heard anyone talk about but my dad. That could very well be due to the fact that my only photography teacher has been my dad, but still :-)
The element is called 'point', and it's rather hard to describe in technical terms. Whereas line and curve and framing are all fairly easy to explain, point is an element that is best shown:
Pepper on a fried egg
A red tomato set within a basket of green peppers
Three black birds sitting on a power line
The steeple of a church
The star on a Christmas tree
The red ornaments on a Christmas tree
Two glowing green eyes peering between stalks of corn on a moonless night
The slight part of a bride's lips just before the groom kisses her
In photography, point is not the main subject, but it's the detail that draws the eye and is often the difference between a nice photo and a photo that you look at a second time. Imagine something as simple as a photo of a fried egg, what exactly does the pepper do for it?
Adds contrast? Breaks up the solid color?
I like the egg 'show' of what point is because the photo is not of pepper, it's definitely a photo of an egg, but you can't help but notice the pepper when it's there. It draws the eye, and yet does not change the subject of the photo.In writing, the word 'point' is often thought of as the moral or the plot or the main conflict. I think that works pretty well--in most cases the 'point' is seen as the main event. I can talk to my kids for half an hour and then say "The point is . . ." effectively summing it up. So, there are definitely interpretations of the word. But for right now I want you to ponder the details of your current Work in Progress, viewing 'point' within the photography definition of the element. I want you to back up and look at the 'points' in your writing. What is it that makes your book different than others? Not in overall things, but in the detail. Things like:
The smell of freshly cut grass that clings to his skin
Highly polished loafers that catch the light of the ballroom
A nervous habit of shaking the coins in his pocket
The amber glints in her otherwise green eyes
The fact that there are two different colors of shingles on the house
A doorbell that plays the first measure of Bethoven's fifth symphony
A doorbell that plays nothing at all
The barking dog just after two a.m.
I promise that you have them--or better yet, I sincerely hope you have them. My favorite books always do. And yet sometimes I look at my own writing and find that those details are missing, that I've become so caught up in the 'Point' of my story that I've forgotten the 'point'--which is to make it real. To bring fiction--unreal; completely made up things--to life. I submit that it's those details that are the difference between good books and great books.
Look around you right now, where ever you happen to be and find point--a detail that draws your eye. It won't be your computer or your desk, but something small, something that almost goes unnoticed.
For me, it's the silver lettering on the spine of a book on my desk that reflects the light of my computer; it looks like christmas lights set inside the cover. Or perhaps it's the orange highlighter wedged between a hundred other writing utensils in my pen holder. Maybe it's the sheen of the light that catches the scotch tape holding a quote to the wall above my desk, or the smudge of black on the side of my printer that I've never gotten around to cleaning.
Take a minute and notice the details, the points, around you. Then find a way to show them in words, to create them for your reader. Doing this type of exercise on a regular basis will not only make you more aware of the world around you, but will likely make your readers more aware of the world you create in your book--and that, after all, is really the point, isn't it?
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
One of the Many Revisited
by Annette Lyon
Last time I talked about how there are so many aspiring writers out there and how only those few with the inner fire will make it.
As a follow-up, I feel like I need to explain my general writing philosophy.
One commenter said in part:
Everyone should be encouraged to write. It's never a waste of time--even if all they do is write little stories for their children, or blog or letters to missionaries.
I couldn't agree more. But since my two opinions seem to conflict, today I'll clarify my stance.
Writers who think it would be "neat" to publish a book most likely won't get there. That's why I say it's a waste of time to encourage and mentor these folks. They're traveling a path they don't have any intention of seeing the end of (especially when--not if--it takes major ups and down to reach that end).
What's the point of that?
That's what last week's post was about.
What I also believe is that writing as a process should always be encouraged. There is power to putting words together and expressing one's innermost thoughts and feelings.
In a very real way, writing can be a powerful form of meditation and prayer.
Writing can free the mind and heart and even act as a type of therapy, a catharsis.
Writing helps you learn what you really think and really feel about a topic, a situation, an event, or even a person.
Writing out a personal problem can help you solve it.
And writing can do much more.
I believe everyone on the planet should be this kind of writer. Everyone could benefit from the simple act of putting pen to paper or fingers to keyboard and making something out of nothing, of putting their souls into words and expressing themselves if this amazing medium.
This need to communicate, this power of writing, I believe, is the reason behind the huge boom in blogging and the increasing number of blogs every single day. Anyone can write and have a readership. It's revolutionary.
People want to write. They want to be heard. They want to express themselves.
And they should do all of those things, whether they are one of the few with the fire of publication inside them . . . or whether they are not.
Because everyone should write. This world might be a happier place if there were more people writing things out, regardless of whether it ever gets published.
Last time I talked about how there are so many aspiring writers out there and how only those few with the inner fire will make it.
As a follow-up, I feel like I need to explain my general writing philosophy.
One commenter said in part:
Everyone should be encouraged to write. It's never a waste of time--even if all they do is write little stories for their children, or blog or letters to missionaries.
I couldn't agree more. But since my two opinions seem to conflict, today I'll clarify my stance.
Writers who think it would be "neat" to publish a book most likely won't get there. That's why I say it's a waste of time to encourage and mentor these folks. They're traveling a path they don't have any intention of seeing the end of (especially when--not if--it takes major ups and down to reach that end).
What's the point of that?
That's what last week's post was about.
What I also believe is that writing as a process should always be encouraged. There is power to putting words together and expressing one's innermost thoughts and feelings.
In a very real way, writing can be a powerful form of meditation and prayer.
Writing can free the mind and heart and even act as a type of therapy, a catharsis.
Writing helps you learn what you really think and really feel about a topic, a situation, an event, or even a person.
Writing out a personal problem can help you solve it.
And writing can do much more.
I believe everyone on the planet should be this kind of writer. Everyone could benefit from the simple act of putting pen to paper or fingers to keyboard and making something out of nothing, of putting their souls into words and expressing themselves if this amazing medium.
This need to communicate, this power of writing, I believe, is the reason behind the huge boom in blogging and the increasing number of blogs every single day. Anyone can write and have a readership. It's revolutionary.
People want to write. They want to be heard. They want to express themselves.
And they should do all of those things, whether they are one of the few with the fire of publication inside them . . . or whether they are not.
Because everyone should write. This world might be a happier place if there were more people writing things out, regardless of whether it ever gets published.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Is This a Kissing Book?
By Julie Wright
I was a guest speaker at the LTUE symposium a couple of weeks ago and oddly enough, was placed on a panel dealing with romance in the science fiction and fantasy markets.
The room was full. People wanted to know how to include good romance in their novels and what consisted of good romance. I was surprised. I didn't think anyone would show up to that panel.
What made the panel extra cool (aside from the fact that I was on it) was that Tracy and Laura Hickman were on it with me. These are people who are universally acknowledged as brilliant writers. They've won the accolades of generations worth of readers. In short, they know what they're talking about.
And the discussion went to the basic human need to be part of a companionship. Humans need love. They need to give it and receive it. And all things at their core come down to that one amazing word: LOVE.
It is no wonder that an infant deprived of affection will literally perish from a syndrome called "Failure to thrive." At the beginning of the last century, the mortality among children under two years of age, living in orphanages in Europe and in North America, was almost 100%. These children were being well taken care of physically. They had all the food and health care they needed. Yet hundreds of those babies died. At that time, they feared touching the babies would spread germs and infection. That was changed in 1920 by a pediatrician who made a rule that all babies get a certain time allotment for "mothering" every day. The mortality rate dropped dramatically. The babies only needed love in order to survive.
Love is so wired into our basic needs that we will die without it, much like we will die without oxygen and food. So, should your book have an element of romance? Maybe. Maybe not. It depends if you want to relate to your reader at a very basic emotional level or not. Part of your job as a writer is to make certain your readers can relate to the characters. If you have aliens, you can't make them so alien that the reader cannot connect with them, or you fail as a writer.
At the beginning of Princess Bride, the young sick boy interrupts his grandfather and says with a great deal of accusation, "Is this a kissing book?"
When Grandpa gets to the kissing part, he stops reading, but is encouraged to continue by the same child who had already declared he wanted nothing to do with kissing. Why the change?
Because even at his young age, and feeling a little hesitant to step into something that might brand him as a sissy, the child recognized that true love really does conquer all.
And I'm not saying you have to have kissing and sex in your novel--I'm saying you need love. That love can come from a relationship between a man and woman, a mother and daughter, two best friends willing to die to save each other--it can come from any relationship where two humans let go of their own pride long enough to find something worth living for.
You might find yourself saying, "Well, this is a historical book." What? People didn't love each other historically? Or maybe you're writing a war novel. Do you think people give up their basic needs just because they are in a war?
Even the Grinch needed his heart to grow in order to find his happy ending.
No, you don't always have to include romance (in the strict sense of boy meets girl), but if you want your book to strike that perfect chord of poetry where you have spoken to your reader in a language they will always understand, you'd better make certain to remember Love.
I was a guest speaker at the LTUE symposium a couple of weeks ago and oddly enough, was placed on a panel dealing with romance in the science fiction and fantasy markets.
The room was full. People wanted to know how to include good romance in their novels and what consisted of good romance. I was surprised. I didn't think anyone would show up to that panel.
What made the panel extra cool (aside from the fact that I was on it) was that Tracy and Laura Hickman were on it with me. These are people who are universally acknowledged as brilliant writers. They've won the accolades of generations worth of readers. In short, they know what they're talking about.
And the discussion went to the basic human need to be part of a companionship. Humans need love. They need to give it and receive it. And all things at their core come down to that one amazing word: LOVE.
It is no wonder that an infant deprived of affection will literally perish from a syndrome called "Failure to thrive." At the beginning of the last century, the mortality among children under two years of age, living in orphanages in Europe and in North America, was almost 100%. These children were being well taken care of physically. They had all the food and health care they needed. Yet hundreds of those babies died. At that time, they feared touching the babies would spread germs and infection. That was changed in 1920 by a pediatrician who made a rule that all babies get a certain time allotment for "mothering" every day. The mortality rate dropped dramatically. The babies only needed love in order to survive.
Love is so wired into our basic needs that we will die without it, much like we will die without oxygen and food. So, should your book have an element of romance? Maybe. Maybe not. It depends if you want to relate to your reader at a very basic emotional level or not. Part of your job as a writer is to make certain your readers can relate to the characters. If you have aliens, you can't make them so alien that the reader cannot connect with them, or you fail as a writer.
At the beginning of Princess Bride, the young sick boy interrupts his grandfather and says with a great deal of accusation, "Is this a kissing book?"
When Grandpa gets to the kissing part, he stops reading, but is encouraged to continue by the same child who had already declared he wanted nothing to do with kissing. Why the change?
Because even at his young age, and feeling a little hesitant to step into something that might brand him as a sissy, the child recognized that true love really does conquer all.
And I'm not saying you have to have kissing and sex in your novel--I'm saying you need love. That love can come from a relationship between a man and woman, a mother and daughter, two best friends willing to die to save each other--it can come from any relationship where two humans let go of their own pride long enough to find something worth living for.
You might find yourself saying, "Well, this is a historical book." What? People didn't love each other historically? Or maybe you're writing a war novel. Do you think people give up their basic needs just because they are in a war?
Even the Grinch needed his heart to grow in order to find his happy ending.
No, you don't always have to include romance (in the strict sense of boy meets girl), but if you want your book to strike that perfect chord of poetry where you have spoken to your reader in a language they will always understand, you'd better make certain to remember Love.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
