Writing Tip: It is OK to Change Course

Tags

authors, fiction, fiction writing, On Writing, spreadsheets, story outline, the craft of writing, writers, writing, writing a book, writing advice, writing fiction, Writing tips

Hey,

Sorry I’ve been off the radar for about a month. I was super busy with teaching and freelancing, and of course, writing. Despite my crazy schedule, I still find the time to write, even if it simple editing or a paragraph or two. I am determined to finish my second book, and am enjoying the process while I’m at it.

Photo by Craig Chew-Moulding on Flickr via Creative Commons

That is not to say there hasn’t been bumps in the road. No, I’m not talking about this one and that one. I’m talking about the struggle to write at times. Working on this project has not been a free-flowing experience, nor has it been easy and fun. There has been doubts and overanalyzing over which scene should go next, or whether a scene works at all, or should this argument happen or not, and so on. Writing is both an art and a science, I believe. The artistic part comes when the muse does all the work and there’s stream of consciousness while writing. The scientific comes when you step back and wonder whether everything is working out just fine.

Recently, I was having problems with some scenes and even entire chapters. I felt what I had written was boring and dull, and the story was not going where I wanted it to go. As you might recall, I created a spreadsheet to outline my WIP. I had outlined the entire book with a spreadsheet, and I was trying to stick to it as loyally as I could.

But this weekend, I realized it is OK to not stick to the course, and to go off course with the outline. Once I did, I had a grand time writing – putting in 1800 words in a couple of hours, and thoroughly excited about where my story is headed. I still hope to get back on course, in terms of my spreadsheet, but I think what I’ve written has spiced things up, so to speak (no, I’m not talking about a sex scene at this point).

So, here’s my latest writing tip: it is OK to change the course. Sometimes the muse knows just what she is doing.

 

Advertisements

The Real Richmond College

Tags

colleges, creative writing, fiction, names, New York City, places, schools, Staten Island, The Dark Proposal, Wagner College

Many authors create fictitious names of businesses, entertainers, institutions and others in order to avoid using famous names without permission. It also helps not to use famous names of places, people, and things so it would not sound like an author is trying to misrepresent the like by the way they write about, whether intended or not.

I certainly did this when I created Richmond College in “The Dark Proposal”, the higher ed institution on Staten Island, where Claire graduated and worked part-time at, met her two friends, Samantha and Monica, and of course, met vampire Daniel Bertrand there. I clearly didn’t have the resources to use an actual college on Staten Island, nor did I want to ruffle any feathers. So I made up a name.

Well, to be honest, not really. Richmond College used to be an actual institution on Staten Island, starting in 1965. It merged with Staten Island Community College in 1976 to become the College of Staten Island, which these days is part of the City University of New York (CUNY). I chose this name for Claire’s school because I wanted something authentically Staten Island for my book, since I aim to bring attention to the borough where I was born and raised in.

Image via Wikimedia Commons

While also aiming to have something related to Staten Island, I chose an actual college on Staten Island as the setting for Richmond College. Meaning, in my mind, I used an actual campus. That college campus is that of Wagner College, until recently, the only school with dorms on the Island. I once taught ESL one summer at Wagner, and it is a very lovely campus, sitting atop of the highest part of Staten Island. Since I needed a college with dorms for “The Dark Proposal”, and in 2012, the year I wrote the book, Wagner was the only one with that, I chose its campus as the setting. Whenever I visualize Richmond College for my book, I picture Wagner College.

So, there you have it. The Real Richmond College(s).

Book Review: “On Writing” by Stephen King

Tags

books, craft of writing, fiction, fiction writing, how to write a novel, Stephen King, writing, writing a novel

At long last, I finally read and completed Stephen King’s “On Writing – A Memoir of the Craft”, his part autobiography, part how-to-write book which has been widely received. I had heard many great things about this book, and earlier this year, felt it was time for me to finally learn from The Master.

Click here to check out the book on Amazon!

This is a great book, even though many have said so. But I want to re-echo it, this is a great book if you want to learn the craft of writing. Here are a few things that stood out for me:

“You must not come lightly to the blank page”:
I like how Stephen King talks about we writers must approach the blank page like we’re “ready to kick ass and take down names”. Or even, “with nervousness, excitement, hopeful, or even despair”. He’s, of course, very passionate about writing, and he’s the kind of writer who was born to write. People like that would see flakey writers as insulting to the craft of writing. That is why he says, “its writing, damn it, not washing the car or putting on eyeliner.” True, very true.

Reading King’s tough words made me wonder how exactly do I approach the blank page. I certainly do not take lightly. But I am one of those who does with the “nervousness, excitement, hopeful, or even despair”. I am not the kind looking to kick ass, though I could imagine it would be fun to do so!

“The best form of dialogue attribution is said”:
Yeah, I’m one of those writers who feels – and even likes – to use attributions like asked, shouted, whispered, etc. I just feel like it gets rid of the repetitiveness of said. Sure, it might be OK to do that, but I also get what King means. We as writers are supposed to allow our readers to decide for themselves what is going on. In this case, our readers are to figure out what tone or level of voice characters are speaking in. Using other attributions would be like holding a reader’s hand, or rather, telling rather than showing. We all know the main rule for writing fiction: show, don’t tell.

“I don’t believe any novelist…has too many thematic concerns”:
This is interesting because for anyone who’s ever sat in an English Lit class, themes are one of the biggest topics when discussing a novel. King brings this up, but makes it clear that it not important, or as he puts it: “no big deal”. The themes in his novels are simply “interests which have grown out of my life and thought, out of my experience” as a human being. He also adds that “good fiction always begins with story and progresses into a theme”, and not vice versa. I found this to be a relief because whenever I write, I worry about themes. I remember that issue being drilled into my head in high school and college, and at one point, it scared me away from any fiction writing.

Its unfortunate that many English teachers are forgetting the important thing about fiction: it is sometimes just a story.

But only sometimes. Even King, when he ends off this part, says, “once your basic story is on paper, you need to think about what it means”. Themes are inevitable, but they are not the point of writing a story.

“Paragraph, not the sentence, is the basic unit of writing”:
I like this because this is something I’ve noticed when I write. I put a lot of thought into where a paragraph starts and where it ends. Sentences, particularly their content and length, don’t worry me as much. Paragraphs on the other hand, kind of stress me out in a way! I always worry if they’re too short or too long, or if one short paragraph should really be on its own or be part of a larger one. I even worry if I have too many short paragraphs going on.

But I worry because I realize how important a paragraph is. As King puts it, “it is a marvellous and flexible instrument…you have to learn the beat”. Yep, paragraphs are the rhythm to a novel.

Anyway, I highly recommend Stephen King’s classic book on the craft of writing. Please do read this you haven’t already. You’ll learn a lot and you’ll be relieved a lot. Either way, it is the book all writers need to have on their shelves, with many pages dog-earred.

 

 

 

The Dark Proposal – 50% Off on Smashwords!

Tags

abusive relationships, authors, book characters, book promotion, books, eBooks, explicit content, fiction, graphic content, NA, New Adult, New adult books, promotion, reading, Smashwords, urban fantasy, vampire books, vampires

Click here to purchase on Smashwords

I’m a little late in Smashwords’ summer promotion sales, but hey, better late than never!

My book, “The Dark Proposal” is 50% off the eBook site. This promotional sale will run until July 31st, before it goes back to its original price of $2.99.

If you’d like to purchase it on Smashwords, here is the promo code: SSW50

As you may know, “The Dark Proposal” is about a college graduate who thought she met perfect boyfriend, until he reveals to be a malicious vampire with a sinister proposal.

The book begins at the end of the summer, so this may be good timing!

Happy reading!

So Reading Can Change Your Brain…

Tags

books, brain studies, characters, fiction, novels, reading

In recent days, there have been articles going around that reading fiction can make changes to your brain. It leads to connectivity changes in your brain, which can change your perspective and alert the sensory parts. This is based on a study done at the Emory University, which was published in the journal Brain Connectivity last month.

Photo by Spirit-Fire on Flickr, found via Creative Commons

Now some may agree with Nature editor’s Noah Gray’s snarky tweet: “Reading a novel induces connectivity changes in the brain … But so does everything else you did or are doing today.”

There’s been plenty of articles, studies and op-eds that discuss the effect of reading a novel. Some argue that reading novels makes us more empathetic, and therefore more human.

I think reading a novel all depends on how you approach it. Sometimes I read fiction to escape my world. Sometimes I read because I hear the prose is incredible. Or I’m interested in how an author will re-tell a famous story (as I was when I picked up A Song of Achilles, which retold the Iliad by making Achilles and Patroclus lovers last year) or what they have to say about certain social issues.

I admit that I don’t often read a novel because of a character. I guess that will be strange to some, but the above examples is what drives me to read fiction. I don’t aim to be more empathetic or be a better human being. I tend to read to learn or be entertained. I wonder if that means I am poorly affected by fiction, unlike other readers.

I want to change that. I want to try to read a novel based on the characters. I want to start reading blurbs and try to focus on the characters rather than the setting and the plot. That could be my New Years’ resolution as a reader – however there are books I’d like to read that go along with my usual habits. But I’ll try my best.

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!