Writing Tip: Always Give Your Character Something to Do

Tags

creative writing, fiction writing, fictional characters, On Writing, the art of writing, the craft of writing, the writing process, writing a book, writing fiction, writing tip, Writing tips

Years ago, I took a fiction writing course where the instructor regularly gave tips on how to write an outstanding novel. Among those tips were, always give your character something to do.

If only I had remembered that recently.

Click here for original image on Jim Delorey’s website

As I was writing the follow-up to “The Dark Proposal” a couple of weeks ago, I was hit a brick wall. I was totally stuck on where to go and what to do next with the story. It was so frustrating because I had written scenes that I was proud of, and I was delighted with where the story was going. But then suddenly, it wasn’t going anywhere. I had hit writer’s block after doing so much with my WIP.

After a few days of editing, re-writing and deleting scenes that just weren’t working, I finally realized what was wrong: the story had become boring. Why though? Why right after such powerful scenes did it suddenly take a downturn. Was it because those scenes were hard to follow? After thinking it over, the memory of that instructor came back and realized what was wrong.

Claire was not doing anything.

Right after a few good scenes, the main character of my story was doing absolutely nothing. She was practically sitting around, moping and feeling sorry for herself. She was not doing any activity, any action, nothing. Just sitting there.

Was that boring or what?

So, I erased that scene and re-wrote it, giving Claire something to do. Then I was satisfied with it.

Now I understand why that writing instructor made an emphasis on giving a character something to do. Without any action or activity, a character is just sitting there. Does that sound fun? Interesting? Enticing? Heck, if I was bored with it, chances are, so would a reader.

So lesson learned and a tip from me: always give your character something to do. It gives momentum to the story, and it keeps it flowing. A novel should be rolling effortlessly, and any stalls means a stall in the storytelling. No one likes to be bored writing or reading. Then again, so doesn’t your character! Give them something to do. They’ll thank you for it.

 

Advertisements

The Theme of My Female Characters

Tags

authors, books, evil characters, female characters, feminism, feminist, main characters, novelists, novels, personalities, strong women, writers, writing

As I work on my WIP “The Cats”, I notice that I seem to be repeating a familiar characterization of my main character, which happens to be female. Instead of writing a kick-ass, strong female, I’ve made mine, once again, timid and unable to fully stand-up for herself. Am I starting a trend in my stories?

It seems as if the best liked female characters, especially those that are the main characters, are tough and take no crap from anyone. But the main characters in my two books – “The Dark Proposal” and the WIP, “The Cats” – are the opposite. Granted, with my current project, the main character has to be because she is bullied. Bullied people aren’t usually strong, confident people anyway. The same goes for some people who get into abusive relationships, like Claire did in “The Dark Proposal”. I also have some story ideas where the female character is either timid or troubled. Very few of my story ideas have a strong, tough female character.

What does this mean? Am I against strong women?

Image via Pixabay

Far from it. As I once mentioned before when I discussed this topic, I prefer a kind of character who’s like a phoenix rising from the ashes. Personally, I find kick-ass, strong characters to be very boring. Especially since, in the case of the female character, they are almost perfect and not complex enough. It seems like female characters are not allowed to be complex, with strengths and weaknesses like all other human beings. Male characters are allowed to be flawed, but not females.

I also have story ideas where the female character is done right evil and does terrible things. Does that make me an anti-feminist? Again, far from it! I just believe in capturing the human race as it is. Women can be awful just like men, or be spineless as anyone else. That doesn’t mean that I am against women being strong or good. I just know from life’s experiences that women can be weak or evil, just like men.

I’m aware that many readers prefer strong characters, especially when it comes to women. I know that means I may lose readers or not have a huge bestseller if I stick to my formula for female characters. Hey, I may not even get a book deal with a major publisher that way. But I truly believe writers should write what is in their heart’s desire, rather than what is popular. I’m also someone who cannot write what is in my system, so I cannot write something that is trendy or would be a worthy bestseller. It just wouldn’t come natural, and I would be bored writing the story.

So, writing not-so-strong female characters looks to be the norm for me. Maybe that would be the theme for my characters during my authorship, as in, it would be something I would be known for. And I like that 🙂

 

 

Choosing the Appearances of My Characters

Tags

authors, blond hair, blue eyes, books, brown eyes, brown hair, characterdescription, eye color, fictional characters, fictious characters, hair color, novels, writers, writing, writing a novel

I was meeting with my writer’s group this week, and as always, we discussed our latest projects and what we are doing with them. Somehow, the topic of characters’ physical descriptions came up and it lead to an in-depth discussion on how authors describe the appearance of their characters.

This is a topic I’ve seen pop up on Goodreads, Google+ and other places where writers gather to chat. It intrigues me that something that seems trivial sparks such debate, as akin to writing in present or past tense, how explicit a sex scene should be, and so on. I say this because I am the type of writer who likes to describe the appearance of my characters.

Not that I go into total detail, right down to a small freckle or chipped tooth. But I do like to tell a reader what color is the hair and eyes of my characters. I do this because I find it fun to imagine what my characters look like. I’m the kind of author who often wonders what actors would play them, if my book or other story ideas were to ever be made into a movie or TV show.

In addition, I believe hair and eye color say a lot about how that person would be perceived by readers. Whether we like it or not, people are judged by their hair and eye color. Dark haired men are seen as seductive and masculine, while blond men are seen as boyish and playful. Blond women are seen as youthful, fun and a target for casual sex. Brunettes are serious and good for long-term relationships. Redheads are vivacious and easy to remember. Blue eyes represent innocence, while brown eyes represent seriousness.

Granted, these are all stereotypes that can be largely untrue. But color represents something, especially when it comes to hair and eyes. And the aforementioned stereotypes do come to mind more often than we admit (the saying “blonds have more fun!” is a popular theory). So, when I am deciding what my characters look like, I can’t help but consider what hair and eye color represent.

Photo by Matlachu via Pixabay

My main character, Claire McCormick, has brown hair and blue eyes. I deliberately chose that because I wanted a mix of innocence and seriousness for her. She’s a 22 year-old college grad who is naive and insecure in a lot of ways, but has room to grow and be tough. She’s also not an aimless, carefree person. So with that, I gave her brown hair and blue eyes.

Now, imagine I made her a blond. That would change your perception of her, yes? It could also change your expectations of her. Red hair just wouldn’t work, and neither would jet black hair. Don’t get me started on pink, lavender or gray hair.

Some would point out that if light-haired men with light-colored eyes appear harmless, why did I make the evil Daniel Poncher, Claire’s vampire boyfriend, look like that? Because I wanted to through my readers off. Since Daniel is practically the abusive boyfriend, giving him dark hair and eyes might make readers more fearful or angrier at him than they need to be. He might also come across as too sinister than he already is. So by having him with light brown hair and blue-green eyes, he’s less threatening, even though he is a threatening character. I simply wanted to have a contradiction for Daniel, and it also makes it easier for me to write about him. Having him tall, dark and handsome (OK, he is a handsome guy) just wouldn’t have worked for me.

Now let’s look at height. Daniel is medium height, about 5’8″ while Claire is a medium sized girl at about 5’5″. This is the first time I ever mentioned their exact heights; I only mention that they are of medium height once in The Dark Proposal. I left it vague because I did want my readers to figure out their exact heights on their own, and also because the exact measurements weren’t too important. But did it matter to mention that both Claire and Daniel were of medium heights for a man and a woman? Yes, because I feel with those heights they are both less threatening and more likely to be taken seriously by readers. If Claire was something like 5’2′, readers would probably fear more for her physical safety in the hands of Daniel. But if she were 5’10”, they would probably feel she should beat him up in retaliation (then again, relationship violence can happen to anyone of any size). At the same time, I feel having them as medium sized makes them easier to relate to and are more approachable as characters.

There’s a lot of explore with this topic. So much goes into why authors make their characters look a certain way, or choose not to give any description at all. It is perhaps a bigger topic than choosing to write in present or past tense, or writing violent or explicit scenes. It gives a whole new meaning to the saying, “To be or not to be?”

What are your thoughts? Do you think certain hair and eye colors effect how you see characters? Does it matter or not? Or is it all subconscious?

Inventing Names for Your Characters

Tags

authors, books, characters, cultures, languages, names, naming characters, vampires, what's in a name, writing

I love choosing names for my characters. I once said that I choose my characters’ names

Image via Wikimedia Commons

very carefully, especially if they are an important person to the story.

But what happens if I need to come up with names of some of the characters? As in, they are from another world, dimension or time period almost forgotten to history?

When writing my book, I came up with the idea that the first vampires would be millennia old. That meant I would have to invent names for them. This required a little creativity and consideration on my part.

When I read books where the characters have invented names, I think it is imperative that the names are simple enough to pronounce. I don’t like it when authors create names that sound more like gibberish than something where some thought was put into it.

I also think that if by chance the invented name(s) may be difficult to pronounce, I think the author should provide a pronunciation guide at the beginning or end of the book. I simply don’t want my readers to be confused or annoyed if they are stumbling over names.

But not all authors do this. The author of the Kushiel’s Universe series, Jacqueline Carey, doesn’t have a pronunciation guide in her books. Instead she explains this on her website: I’d rather let each reader decide what sounds right to his or her own individual ear than dictate it to you.

I like that idea a lot, but I feel like I owe it to my readers to understand how to pronounce invented names. Maybe in future books I wouldn’t do this, but now I feel like I should.

Which sounds a bit hypocritical because I never explained how the names of the original vampires, the Five Brothers, in “The Dark Proposal” are to be pronounced. Part of me felt like I should’ve done it, but I told myself that they are secondary characters, so don’t worry. No one has complained or asked questions. But if anyone wants to know, feel free to drop me a line.

But for those who wonder how I came up with their names, I’ll explain. I was inspired by other languages and names from other cultures. Sometimes I took a name or word, and tweaked it to make it more original. Or I actually did take a name from a lesser known culture, mainly because I liked the way it sounds and/or the way it looks spelled out. And on some of the names, I actually did make up a name off the top of my head. But I didn’t base that name on gibberish. Instead I came up with something easy to pronounce with a touch of a foreign language to it.

Names are fun. Making up names is fun too. But my belief is not to have too much fun and to remember your readers.

I’m curious about your thoughts on this. As a reader, writer or both, how do you handle invented names?

I’d Say Writing is Like Acting

Tags

acting, actors, authors, characters, writing

I have a few actor friends and sometimes they tell me about their craft. They talk about getting into character and trying to understand the thoughts and feelings of that person in order to bring them to life. When I hear them describe this process, I can’t help but notice the similarities between writing and acting.

Image via Wikimedia Commons

Now, writers don’t perform in front of an audience. Whatever “performance” we do is done when someone reads our work, usually unbeknownst to us. We don’t know of their reaction until they leave a review somewhere, if they do.

For actors, they don’t need to bring to life the whole scene with the description of whatever place a scene is taking place in or the vibe in whatever room. They’re responsible for bringing to life their characters.

But for us writers, so are we.

When I write my characters, I do feel as though I have to get into not only their heads, but their skin. I need to feel their feelings, know their life history, know their thoughts in order to make them come to life. I analyze my characters – especially the main ones – similar to my actor friends. I need to understand them in order to make my readers understand them.

When it comes to villainous characters, some actors say they have fun playing the bad guy. Judging by some performances, they do appear to enjoy themselves. I didn’t enjoy writing Daniel like that. That’s because to me, he is not a villain to have fun writing about. I have plans to do that for other villainous characters in my vampire trilogy. However, I didn’t totally hate him. I mean, yes I did, but I had to understand why he was the way he was and why he did what he did in order to tolerate him. Even now I do that. I guess writers and actors have to take a neutral stance sometimes with their characters in order to tell a story.

So, I take it this is another sign that writing is an art.

How about you? Do you see the similarities between writing and acting, or is it different for you?

NOTE: I won’t be posting this Friday, as it is the Thanksgiving weekend here in the U.S. To all my American readers, have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Can Evil Ever Be Redeemed?

Ah, villains. Some stories cannot be stories without them. You may have your antagonist in some, but others need that vicious, evil person wreaking havoc on one person, or many peoples’ lives.

Villains can be fun or tormenting. On one hand, you’ve got those you love to hate, or even hate to love. Then there are those who give you headaches because what they do to others is so hateful and their lack of empathy is mindboggling.

But all bad people have reasons for being bad, and their actions have motives that have deep roots. Some would argue that no one is born evil, and those who do become villainous were corrupted due to abuse or a insecure world. But no matter the circumstances, bad people chose to do bad things. Is it ever understandable? Could we ever do the same things if we lived the same lives as them? Let’s take a look at some well-known characters who chose to dark road:

Click here for original source

Regina – “Once Upon A Time”: I got the idea for this post while watching Once Upon A Time this past Sunday (BTW, season 3 is going very well so far!). Even though the curse is broken now, Regina still seems reluctant to admit she did awful things to nearly everyone who crossed her path. Instead, she plays the victim card and feels misunderstood. This is because her evil ways were born when a young Snow White was inadvertently responsible for Regina’s boyfriend to be killed by her own scheming, manipulative mother. Taking cues from her mother, Regina spiraled into dark ways as a way for revenge on not only Snow White, but everyone else who seemed happy. These days, Regina is trying to be good for the sake of her son, Henry, who is really her step-grandson (long story). But she’s got a lot of soul searching to do, especially with her self-centered, self-pitying ways. And with all the killings, curses and other abuse she’s done, Regina has a lot to take responsibility for. But can she, with her tendency to be selfish like that?

The Joker – “The Dark Knight”:Seriously, I could not have this post without this character. Who could forget the late Heath Ledger’s turn on Batman’s main nemesis after Jack Nicholson made the Joker a comical villain you actually enjoyed watching? But with “The Dark Knight”, we have the Joker with a major chip on his shoulder, and his behavior can only be defined as being a true psychopath. Maybe it was the way Ledger portrayed this character, but I really felt while watching the movie that there was no hope for redemption here. The Joker was cold-blooded. Period. The entertaining part was to see if the Joker would be defeated and luckily he was. Now if he were to just be arrested and locked up for life, could he have ever let go of his rage and face what he made himself into? I saw no hope there. I only saw a person unable to experience any emotion, and therefore, unable to realize the pain he had caused to others.

Bill Compton – “True Blood”: He started out as one-half of a popular TV couple, but by season three, vampire Bill Compton’s true nature was revealed. It further unveiled itself by season five, which led him to turn into a power-hungry, bloodthirsty vampire, fueled by the terrible writing on the show his conflict over him being one. Could Bill ever go back to being a good guy, though? Well, sometimes you can never go back being what you once were, and there’s no way for Bill to be that southern gentleman/creature of the night again. But he could still tap into his good nature, if he still has it. Sometimes darkness can overwhelm someone’s goodness, and it can cast a very long shadow.

Click here to view original source

Lestat – “The Vampire Chronicles”:Here’s a villain turned guy you love to hate and hate to love! I felt in “Interview With The Vampire”, the brat prince himself was villainous in the way he tormented Louis, even though Louis was whinging and moping around for decades. Lestat in the first of Anne Rice’s vampire novels was to me the charismatic villain, who is so charming when you first meet them. But then you spend more time with them, and you see that charm is covering up sinister ways. Well, Lestat did get redeemed at the end. Once Louis and Claudia broke away from him, he no longer could be that engaging creature of the night. He lost the two people who fueled him, and his dark energy was gone. At the end, Lestat was a shadow of his former self. That’s karma for you. Of course, Anne Rice fans know he reinvented himself as the delighted bratty vampire who was still charming, yet knows not to cross the line anymore.

There is redemption for those who chose to do wrong, but its a long road to get there. And who will support you along the way? Can anyone ever understand why some choose to do wrong? I’ll explore that in my next post!

Why the Hate for Fictional Characters?

Tags

books, Breaking Bad, fiction, fictional characters, haters suck, hating

I came across this NY Times op-ed by actress Anna Gunn, who plays Skyler on the popular show, “Breaking Bad”. She talked about the immense hatred many viewers have for her character. So much so, they even start Facebook groups voicing their hatred for Skyler.

Yikes. I think that’s going a little too far. In fact, very far. We’ve all read books or watched shows with characters we’ve despised – I myself have – but is having so much anger toward a fictitious person who does not exist in real life a good idea?

Sometimes when I browse Goodreads and Amazon, I am surprised when I see such venom for certain characters. I consider Pearl S. Buck’s “The Good Earth” to be one of my all-time favorites. Yes, I despised the main character, Wang Lung, halfway through the book like many others. But it didn’t stir vile hatred in me. He’s fictitious, he’s not real. I have never let him ruin my day.

I once saw a discussion like this on an author’s blog. One commenter mentioned that we seem to hold fictional characters to higher standard than real-life, everyday people. Whether it is at work, at school, with neighbors or in-laws, we all deal with people who are hypocrites, annoying, rude, idiotic and many other flaws. But if we read books – or watch TV or movies – that have characters with such flaws, we seem to hate them more. Its as if we can’t shrug off what a fake person does, but we accept what a real person does.

It may be because there is no consequence. If we hate a character in a book, we can toss it aside and never deal with that person again. In real life, we could get fired, sued, suspended, or just cause tons of drama, if we did anything to express our frustration toward such a person.

But I am still baffled that there are thousands liking a Facebook page dedicated to bashing a fictional character. Especially when that character is neither good nor bad. I could see liking a Facebook group bashing King Joffrey of “Game of Thrones”. But anyone else? I don’t get it. We’re all flawed, and we don’t all handle drama or crises perfectly. Nothing is all black and white, and there’s a lot of room for gray.

That probably is why such outrage happens. When it comes to fiction, readers can get black and white. There’s no rule to reading and everyone has their own experience with each book, much like we all have our own fingerprints.

But I still think there’s more to life than hating on someone who only exists in the realm of fiction.

Author Victoria Grefer is currently discussing this issue on her blog, and she has some great theories of her own! Check out these two posts:

• Why Readers Cut Real People More Slack Than Characters (Who Don’t Exist)
• We See Ourselves In Characters: Is That Why We Judge Them So Harshly?

Why I Don’t Write Strong Female Characters

Tags

Arya Stark, books, characterization, cultural portrayal of women, culture, female characters, fiction, Game of Thrones, how to write a novel, Sansa Stark, strong female characters, writers, writing

A recent article in the British magazine, New Statesman, talked about how female characters in fictions are often depicted as strong – and there are some who are not too thrilled about that.

Not that being strong is bad thing, not at all! But as the article’s author, Sophia McDougall points out, strong female characters are just that: strong. They kick ass, either by martial arts or weapons, and have little room for weakness. I get it that this is likely the result of a backlash against such books as the Twilight series, where it’s heroine, Bella Swan, is doormat. There is also a desire to see female characters who are able to stand up for themselves and be their own person, because historically, society has preferred women to be passive.

But I always felt that the need for strong female characters has led to some of them being so strong, they almost cannot be related to. And the criteria for a strong female character was always the same: she kicks butt, has an in-your-face attitude, doesn’t desperately need a man in order to be complete, and hardly ever cries. To me, that’s a narrow definition on what it means to be strong.

Even more so, it doesn’t allow the female character to be more human, and as McDougall points out, it is not on par with male characters who are considered strong:

Are our best-loved male heroes Strong Male Characters? Is, say, Sherlock Holmes strong? In one sense, yes, of course. He faces danger and death in order to pursue justice. On the other hand, his physical strength is often unreliable – strong enough to bend an iron poker when on form, he nevertheless frequently has to rely on Watson to clobber his assailants, at least once because he’s neglected himself into a condition where he can’t even try to fight back. His mental and emotional resources also fluctuate. An addict and a depressive, he claims even his crime-fighting is a form of self-medication. Viewed this way, his willingness to place himself in physical danger might not be “strength” at all – it might be another form of self-destructiveness. Or on the other hand, perhaps his vulnerabilities make him all the stronger, as he succeeds in  surviving and flourishing in spite of threats located within as well without.

It seems like male characters get to more fleshed out human beings while female characters are more one dimensional. They are either weak or super strong, with little room in between. It is kind of bizarre and frustrating that female characters are apparently not allowed to be fully human, with their quirks and flaws, along with their toughness and strong-will. To be honest, I feel the current criteria for a strong female character is almost a mockery of how strong a woman should be.

Click here for Flickr source

It also seems to say that in order for a woman to be strong, she needs to be more masculine. Let’s look at Game of Thrones and two of it’s very different female characters: the Stark sisters, Sansa and Arya. Many fans of the show and books love Arya because she is a tough girl willing to fight and kick butt. Basically, she is a tomboy. And she’s so popular, fans are naming their daughters after her.

On the other hand, her older sister, Sansa is frowned upon for being more ladylike, preferring dancing, singing and embroidery. Now, Sansa is not a well-liked character because she is naive and snooty. That I totally get. But she also not well-liked because she isn’t kicking butt like Arya would. I’ve read many comments online where fans complained about Sansa not physically fighting the Lannisters’, particularly the much hated King Joffrey. Many fans consider Sansa to be weak in this case.

I disagree very much because Sansa does possess enough inner strength to survive months as a prisoner at Kings Landing. I don’t know how many 14 year olds, or even grown adults, would handle watching their father unexpectedly lose their head, be tormented daily by their captors both physically and mentally, living in fear and losing hope of ever escaping their prison. The fact that she hasn’t gone insane is a sign that Sansa Stark is a strong female character – and she doesn’t need a sword or a sharp tongue to prove it.

Furthermore on McDougall’s article, she says there needs to be more equality between male and female characters. If male characters can be well-rounded with their strengths and weaknesses, why can’t their female counterparts?

She says:

What do I want instead of a Strong Female Character? I want a male:female character ratio of 1:1 instead of 3:1 on our screens. I want a wealth of complex female protagonists who can be either strong or weak or both or neither, because they are more than strength or weakness. Badass gunslingers and martial artists sure, but also interesting women who are shy and quiet and do, sometimes, put up with others’ shit because in real life there’s often no practical alternative. And besides heroines, I want to see women in as many and varied secondary and character roles as men: female sidekicks, mentors, comic relief, rivals, villains. I want not to be asked, when I try to sell a book about two girls, two boys and a genderless robot, if we couldn’t change one of those girls to a boy.

When I wrote The Dark Proposal, I set out to create a realistic character in Claire McCormick, and not go with the trends of a über-strong female character. First off, it wouldn’t have worked with my story idea at all. Secondly, I do like characters who are real. Mary Sues and kick-ass females bore me because that’s a standard that is too high for female characters. They kind of make me feel bad myself in a way.

Did I do my best creating a realistic human character in Claire? Let’s check out Sophia McDougall’s checklist:

I want her to be free to express herself: Sometimes Claire does, especially in the early stages in her relationship with Daniel Bertrand. But she also wanted to impress him and his friends, because they were an older, sophisticated group, so she doesn’t really act like herself in a few short scenes. But hey, a lot of people have done that, especially in their young, insecure days.

I want her to have meaningful, emotional relationships with other women: Absolutely! Claire roommates with her two best friends from college, Samantha and Monica. They are all close and go through a lot, particularly trying to live on their own while struggling to find jobs in a difficult world. Here’s a great thing: at times, they do have conversations that do not revolve around guys!

I want her to be weak sometimes: Oh yeah. Being a little insecure makes Claire overlook the warning signs that Daniel isn’t the nicest guy. She also gets so upset when he tells her he wants her to join him for eternity, that she loses rationale. Hey, desperation and fear can make many people lose their minds.

I want her to be strong in a way that isn’t about physical dominance or power: Yep. There are times when Claire does confront and stands up to Daniel. She also does not go insane with what she is faced with, which some people can end up as.

I want her to cry if she feels like crying: Oh does she!

I want her to ask for help: She does, she really tries.

I want her to be who she is: Claire is herself, in a way that shows she is someone trying to find herself as an adult, which as many of us can remember, isn’t the easiest journey to take.

Well, what do you know? Claire McCormick passed the test! She has her moments of weakness and of strength, as all human beings, male or female, do.

How about you? What is your take on how male and female characters are portrayed? Are you more for realistic characters, and are against any criteria? Sound it off!

The Ambiguous Sexuality of Vampires

Tags

bisexuality, bisexuals, fluid sexuality, good and evil, LGBT, morals, Sexuality, writers, writing

I was browsing WordPress blogs this morning when I came across one that had a link to an article on AfterElton.com that discussed how vampires are often depicted as bisexual, and that is not a good thing.

The article, written by Brent Hartinger, pointed out that when vampires are bisexual, particularly on TV and in movies, is usually represents how evil the creature is. In other words, the vampire is so amoral and deprived, it also has sexual perversions, if one considers bisexuality or even homosexuality to be so.

Click here for article on vampire sex by TrueBlood.net

For example, the Cullen clan in the Twilight saga are morally good and heroic, and they are also all heterosexual. But look at True Blood. The villain Russell Edgington is gay and has a boyfriend in season 3 – until Eric kills him. Eric is seen as morally ambiguous throughout the whole series, and becomes sexually ambiguous when he needs to do evil, such as killing Talbot to avenge his Viking family’s murders. Also, Bill was the good vampire for most of the series, and was depicted as heterosexual – with the exception of a scene with shape shifter Sam Merlotte, which disappointingly turned out to be a dream.

Here’s a quote from Hartinger’s op-ed to sum it all up:

Suddenly vampires have stopped being bisexual. The more “good” they are, the less morally dubious, the straighter they’ve become. It’s an almost perfect correlation!

Reading this article shook me. In my book, The Dark Proposal, I have my vampires as bisexual, living in a free-love existence. I never once thought that by giving them fluid sexuality, I was showing how depraved they were. Yes, my vampires are the evil kind, and not the sweet and sensitive ones. But I never once thought that by allowing to be more sexually ambiguous, they were representing their moral sense.

Honestly, I was influenced Anne Rice, who’s vampires are bisexual. But I also didn’t do that just because Anne Rice herself did. My justification of creating bisexual vampires came from how I would think it would be for a vampire, once it realizes it is no longer human and is living apart from humanity. I would think by living in a different world, human rules no longer apply, especially when you realize you have supernatural skills and have found your own key to immortality. Vampires don’t answer to humans, so why should they follow their rules?

In that situation, I would really believe fluid sexuality would be the norm. The reluctance or fear to want to kiss and touch someone of the same gender would be gone. There will be no judgment if one decides to have a same-sex encounter or even experiences homosexual love. After all, they are superior to humans – that is the attitude my vampires have.

I never looked at vampire sexuality as representative of their morals. I always looked it at as part of the sexy side of being a vampire – that no one, male or female, can resist you, and you are open to anyone who interests you, gender be damned. You have no sexual hang-ups, you are true to yourself and don’t care what others think – mainly because you are separate from humans and you look down at them anyway.

But this article has me thinking, especially how I write my two follow-ups to The Dark Proposal. The ideas I had won’t change drastically now, but I will be more aware that some people are not pleased with vampires having fluid sexuality. The LGBT community has been demonized enough, and I certainly don’t want to give readers the impression that I am part of the demonizing crowd. I stand by my reasons for making my vampires bisexual, but I see there are other angles to examine.