Update

Given that this heroes series is more in-depth than I originally thought it would be (and given that life has been throwing some random curves at this writer), I'm gonna have to hold off on that third post for a while. Sorry for the inconvenience! Keep an eye out for in-between articles as I try to get this one finished.

Heroes & Heroines: Part II

       Okay. Now we can get into the fun post – types of heroes and why they are heroes. (I’m dealing with the basic contrasting stereotypes; if I miss an essential one, please feel free to add it in the comments below.) For sake of convenience I’ll be referring to them as “he”, but these definitely apply to heroines, too.

 

1. The Everyday
   WHO: This hero could be your next-door neighbor, or he could even be you (she if you’re a girl). The qualities that make him up are the simplistic qualities you’d find in just about anyone else – with the exception that, because he’s the good guy, he usually has a strong moral conscience.
   WHY: He is a hero because he is just like us – an ordinary person who chose to take the initiative because it was the right thing to do.
2. The Exceptional
   WHO: This hero is the sort of person you don’t usually meet up with. Talented, skilled, full of potential that your average Joe wouldn’t even understand let alone have. Sometimes this hero looks down on others for not being as gifted; other times, this hero feels self-conscious about how different he is.
   WHY: He is a hero because he chooses to use his extraordinary gifting for good, rather than just sit by and watch.
3. The Superhero
   WHO: This hero is the sort of handsome, sophisticated, usually physically strong hero that has a commanding presence and is VERY pleasant to look at. Oftentimes, this hero is incredibly muscular (usually has fantastic abs) and thus is able to do a lot of hard things most other people can’t.
   WHY: He is a hero because he can take out the bad guy when no one else can, although if his only role in the story is to beat everybody up, he’s a pitiful hero.
4. The Plain Jane
   WHO: This hero is the exact opposite of the superhero – weak, clumsy, unattractive. He commonly is the victim of a chronic illness or disability and is often overlooked by people around him
   WHY: He is a hero because he is the most unlikely choice for a hero of all – someone that most people discredit, who has huge obstacles to overcome, and yet does it all for the cause of right or for those he loves.
5. The Diva
   WHO: This hero is that charismatic socializer that fits in anywhere. No matter where he is or whom he is with, he will inevitably become the center of attention. This kind commonly starts off as a more villain type character, experiences extreme dramatic setbacks, and has to start over again as the Black Sheep kind.
   WHY: He is a hero because of his journey,  whether he is always the popular kid and has to deal with the repercussions and dramas of that position, or because he suddenly is lowered in status and has to learn how to be normal.
6. The Black Sheep
   WHO: This hero is extremely common in YA novels because it is a hero most teenagers relate exceptionally well to. He is the sort of person who never fits in, who always does or says the wrong thing, who is surrounded by people who have found their place in their world and is desperately trying to keep up with them.
   WHY: He is a hero because he refuses to conform to what others try to make him be, instead following his beliefs of right and wrong and allowing himself to just be himself (which is usually how he saves the day).
7. The Silent Warrior
   WHO: This hero is a contemplative hero. He doesn’t talk much. He doesn’t smile much. He simply works hard and listens. He’s the sort who surprises everyone with how smart he is or by how good a plan he has configured just by thinking things through first. When he does talk, he has something important to say.
   WHY: He is a hero because when the time comes to act, he is ready. He doesn’t stand around talking; he doesn’t waste time boasting. He just goes in, does his job, and comes out again.
8. The Dragon Slayer
   WHO: This hero is the exact opposite of the Silent Warrior. He talks all the time, laughs a lot and tends to launch straight into things without thinking twice. He is well-known for his elaborate stories and ludicrous adventures, but half of what he says is highly exaggerated.
   WHY: He is a hero because he will not delay to take up any challenge laid before him especially if it’s a matter of right and wrong.
9. The Homebody
   WHO: This hero leaves home only because he has to, and usually spends half the book fighting to get back. His main goal is to preserve the land he loves and the people he loves. He’s usually known as patriotic and is generally a peaceful hero – unless you mess with his home.
   WHY: He is a hero because he will fight to the death to protect his homeland and his family.
10. The Wanderer
    WHO: This hero doesn’t have a home, and if he does he never visits. Instead, he’s constantly moving about, touring the world, usually in search of adventure. Thus he usually is the first to get into trouble or stumble upon international intrigue. His highest quality is his knowledge – he’s been everywhere so he knows everything.
    WHY: He is a hero because lacking a home gives him nothing to fear losing, and so he can do what he needs to and go where he has to go without worrying for anybody else’s safety.
11. The Dark Warrior
    WHO: This hero is haunted by his past, a lingering collage of memories that usually surface in flashbacks or a lot of conversations with his new friends. He is commonly running away from his past, sometimes from someone in his past, and always from his past – and present – self.
    WHY: He is a hero because he has come out of a life of darkness and now lives for the sake of all that is good.
12. The Happy-Go-Lucky
    WHO: This hero doesn’t relate well to the Dark Warrior because he hasn’t experienced that kind of pain and trauma. He’s lived in relative peace and happiness his whole life, had family or friends to take care of him, and has been raised to live for good. Usually this kind of hero finds his life suddenly shattered and ends up with the Dark Warrior as a sidekick to help him realize not all of life is sunshine and rainbows.
    WHY: He is a hero because he knows what good is, he fights for it and he is incapable of succumbing to despair.
13. The Loner
    WHO: This hero is most often seen in the corners of taverns with a hood pulled over his face and nobody at his table. Usually he doesn’t relate well to other people, so he doesn’t bother hanging out with them. He does things by himself, he’s always in charge, and that’s how he prefers it.
    WHY: He is a hero because single-handed he can take out the entire army of bad guys, and that is something the bad guys dread.
14. The Side-Kick Collector
    WHO: This hero doesn’t like being left to do things himself. He prefers to designate, to have multiple people around to back him up, even someone else he can back up. His closest friends are also his co-conspirators. He works well with people and likes to let them see their full potential.
    WHY: He is a hero because he pulls those around him together and makes them into a fearsome fighting force.
15. The Man with a Plan
    WHO: This hero is task-driven. His whole purpose in life is to create elaborate, complex schemes and see them through to completion. His genius is usually unparalleled as he outwits the villains and brings about his purpose with a well-thought-out plan. He’s rarely the most likeable of heroes, but he is irreplaceable in their ranks.
    WHY: He is a hero because his incredible brains give him the ability to counter the evil genius of master villains.
16. The Man of Spontaneity
    WHO: This hero drives the Man with a Plan crazy almost all the time. He doesn’t think before he acts; he doesn’t strategize. His way of doing things is to leap straight in and take it as it comes. He usually comes with a temper. While often a troublemaker, his ready-fire-aim mentality allows him to immediately take on situations without wasting precious time on them.
    WHY: He is the hero because he doesn’t sit around and wait for the enemy – he goes after the enemy.
17. The Moral Conscience
    WHO: This hero is someone who knows what he believes and lives that out. He isn’t afraid of the jokes of others; he knows that he has a higher calling, and he chooses sides accordingly. There is never a doubt in his mind as to what he should do – unless he faces a gray area, and even then it doesn’t take him forever to decide what he can and cannot do based on that conscience.
    WHY: He is a hero because of his shining character and the goodness of his heart, which allows him to fight for what he believes without wavering.
18. The…Lack of Moral ConscienceWHO: This hero is full of himself. He is best described as licentious, sarcastic, and disrespectful. He always gets the girl and doesn’t usually care enough about her to take her on a second date. While at first he sounds like the opposite of a good guy, his extreme liberalistic mindset is often the groundwork for excellent character development as he faces choices that cause him to second guess himself and his lifestyle. (NOTE: a hero is the person we look up to in the story, so if you don’t want to encourage your audience to live life as perverts you’ll have to write about this hero with delicacy.)WHY: He is a hero because he is a good fighter. Otherwise, he isn’t really much of a hero and is more annoying that inspiring.

       In my third post in this series on heroes and heroines, I’ll be bringing out examples of each of these hero types I looked at in this post, and in the following I'll list ways that a writer can combine these traits to create a believable, well-rounded hero or heroine. Keep an eye out and be ready to comment!

      Sincerely,

            Yours Truly

 

Heroes and Heroines: Part I

All dressed in white. All dressed in black. Lace, frills and a bejeweled rapier. Hot leather and a laser gun. A memory of a time when things were beautiful and an urgency to return the former glory. A deep, dark past  filled with regret and a list of moral debts to pay. Compassion, patriotism, humility. Sarcasm, narcissism, an ego-driven save-the-world agenda. Timid but determined. Not a fear in the world.

Each characteristic is something that has come to define heroes in both literature and cinema for the western world. Some call them stereotypes; others call them classics. But whatever you call them, they are to the American culture the top qualifications for a true hero or heroine, whether in historical fiction, crime investigation, or high fantasy. We all love reading about that hero who saved his world from utter destruction, the heroine who sacrificed everything for those she loved. It’s what gives us hope to face a world full of sorrow, suffering and terrible injustice.

But what is it exactly is it that makes a person a hero? Is it just their outfit, attitude and background? Or is it the depth of their character, the quirks of their personality, their strong moral conscience, the way they laugh in the face of danger?

When it comes to writing, it is ESSENTIAL that you not only know your hero but also that you know why he’s the hero.

Looking around at the myriad of books and movies based on the hero’s journey, it’s easy to single out the qualities of the literary hero. But basically, the hero is the hero because he or she is the good guy in the story and in the end helps defeat the bad guy.

Webster’s online dictionary defines a hero this way: “A person who is admired for great or brave acts or fine qualities.” Succinctly put, and yet full of meaning. Under this definition, a hero doesn’t necessarily mean a good person. Instead, a hero is just somebody who did something extraordinary or has a character others look up to.

Now, most people see the “hero” as being the good guy (although there is a large movement toward making the bad guy the hero, too). So in our writer’s eyes, a hero has to be more than just somebody who did something and everybody cheered. A hero has to follow certain structural guidelines, embrace certain foundational beliefs about his or her calling in life. While there are a number of hero stereotypes, there is one basic rule that all heroes follow:

A literary hero must be a leader.

Whether they are born to lead or find out in the second chapter that they had a kingdom they didn’t know about left to them, the hero must always at some point take the lead and have others follow him or her. That is what makes a hero different from a sidekick.

In the next post, I'll be making a list of kinds of heroes, and following that giving samples and examples of each of those kinds. Stay tuned!

Sincerely,

          Yours Truly

The "Well-Read Author"

Everybody says that the best author is the well-read author. But what does it mean to be a well-read author? Automatically images come to mind of a pious reader sitting in a pristine bedroom devouring literature like a washing machine devours socks – someone who strictly reads “the Classics”, who looks down on anyone who hasn’t read “the Classics”, who despises all literature not a part of “the Classics”. Is that image really what we should be aiming for as writers? Or is the true meaning of the phrase “well-read author” being overlooked?

My mom was big into reading. She felt that words were important, that they expressed beauty, emotion and wisdom like nothing else. And she was entirely right. She encouraged us to read on our own as soon as we could, gave us lists of good books, talked with us about them as we read. She also read aloud to us children all through our growing-up years (even after we ceased being children).

And yes, she read us some of “the Classics”. But her reading list wasn’t limited to Dickens, Austen and Tolkien. She also read us Mark Twain, every bit a classic despite being the polar opposite of Dickens in style. She read Lassie Come Home, The Borrowers, The Boxcar Children for heavens’ sake! She even allowed us girls to read a little romantic fluff on the side (the kind that wasn't all mush, mind you.)

Her goal wasn’t to load up our systems with only the great masterpieces published from 1899 or before. She encouraged us to also know our times, to appreciate comedy and tragedy, to take in a variety of authors, genres, styles, topics…In short, my mother’s main goal was to give her children a widely diverse and richly developed foundation in quality literature so that when we were no longer under her care we’d be able to tell a good book from a great book, an ‘okay’ mediocre book from a book whose best description, sadly, is crappy.

What am I trying to say here? That variety and quality are the key to being “well-read”. You can immerse yourself in “the Classics” and come away unable to write anything that a postmodern Young Adult reading audience would really get that much out of. You can go the other way and only read modern books. But in that case you cheat yourself out of the rich vocabulary, deep plotlines and superb characters of “the Classics”.

Best description of a well-read author? A writer who has a foundation of various author styles and genres, the kind of foundation that good writing is bound to come from.

So I have here a checklist of the things that make up a well-read author based on that description:

1. Has read a variety of books from different time periods (Ancient Classics as in the Odyssey, Norse Mythology, Fairy Tales, etc.; First Classics as in Milton, Spencer, Bunyan, etc.; Historic Classics as in Dickens, Austen, Henty, etc; Modern Classics as in Tolkien, Lewis, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, etc;); Modern Literature (anything published after 1950).
2. Has read a variety of author styles (both George MacDonald and Carolyn Keene; both James Fennimore Cooper and Frank Pereti etc.)
3. Has read a variety of genres (contemporary fiction, historical fiction, mystery and spy novels, thrillers, fantasy, science fiction, romance, adventure, poetry, satire, etc.)
4. Has read mostly truly good books but has also kept up with what is currently being published and widely-read.

Being well-read isn’t easy. It’s a process. And for those of us who aren’t really great readers (as in it takes a good deal of effort to read consistently), it’s an extra challenge. However, it’s never too late to start. Just remember that what you read is what you will write. If all you read is cheapy fluff novels, than that’s all you’ll be capable of writing. If you all you read is steampunk or graphic novels, you can’t expect that you’ll be able to write the great American classic.

Having a good background in QUALITY and VARIETY is the key to being a good writer, a writer who will not only write well but who will be taken seriously by publishers, critics and audiences (keeping in mind that most people who don’t write read avariciously; they’ll know a mediocre book when they see one).

So there you have it – what it means to be a well-read author. Now it’s your turn – go and think about what you’ve read and decide if you really are a well-read author or if you don’t believe a word I just said. Whichever you end up deciding on, just remember that the best authors of our time or any other time got to where they were or are by reading.

Leaving You Something to Think About,

                                                            Yours Truly

A Writer's Heart

If the post title sounds like a sappy analysis of what is near and dear to a writer…well, maybe it will be. But right now as I sit here surrounded by old (kind of stuffed) notebooks and some stories I made bindings and covers for myself as a kid, a lot of emotions are welling up in me, emotions I can’t really explain. Memories keep popping into my brain and then swirling, making more emotions. And – well, I couldn’t help but suddenly sit back and realize just how much a writer takes on when he or she starts creating worlds.

Now, I am a bit on the nostalgic side. So maybe it’s just me. But all other writers I’ve met seem to feel the same way. They all feel a connection with the worlds they have made up (whether the worlds resembled New York City, the Alps, or even a far off world that nobody else has ever seen except the mind’s eye of the author). And they feel that same connection to the characters they invented.

Maybe world creating isn’t just make believe that you detach from ‘the real world’. Maybe it’s something that affects us far deeper than people who aren’t writers could possibly get. Something, perhaps, that stays with us for the rest of our lives. Sound crazy? Overthought? Definitely sentimental and far too cheesy?

Think about it: when you create a world, you’re not writing an essay on some foreign culture you were required to study about in college for extra credit. You’re using your imagination (something that, for the writer, is highly sensitive and easily stimulated) to invent a personal fantasy – a fantasy where you basically play the part of God in deciding what happens to who, where, when and how – and you also play the individual parts of the various characters from the hero to the villain, from the sidekick to the lackey. In essence, you take up residence in your world; you take an active role in the events that transpire; you become the people you are writing about.

It doesn’t matter what genre you are writing. Historical fiction, science fiction, mystery, suspense, high fantasy, low fantasy – it all comes back to you as the writer. It’s your world. You invented it; you will inevitably care about it. You will feel the pull on the heartstrings of every character required to make a deep sacrifice. You will feel their rage as they watch the villain get away one more time. You will feel the sweet sensation of relief when another character barely makes it through a critical condition. You feel everything they feel as you write about them.

Other factors come into play here, as well. Images, songs, emotions, ideas. All of these are a part of what inspires a writer to write creatively. They are what give depth to our characters, bring our worlds to life, provide perspective and insight, knowledge about how things would be and wouldn’t be. Our own lives are so deeply connected with our stories that in the end our realities and our fantasies become one. Not in the weird, creepy way that makes for looneys and perverts. But in the strange, amazing way that makes our realities that much richer – because we see stories everywhere.

I will always feel a strange sensation, a pull at my heartstrings when I see the backyard of the parsonage I grew up in from certain pictures because that scenery (the pictures I took in my mind) were part of what inspired me to write certain stories; stories that became a part of me as I created a world and the characters that inhabited it. I’ll feel that same sensation when I pull out my old notebooks and read through pages I printed out years ago – because I didn’t just invent those stories; I lived them.

People who aren’t writers will read this post and think that I am some sort of weirdo. But people who are fiction writers (at least a good percentage of them) will understand all of what I’ve just said. They’ll agree with the statements, probably even have stories of their own to tell about how they get the same feelings from remembering certain scenery, people, music they heard, just about anything. It’s because God created us in His image – creative; full of ideas; capable of inventing; drawn toward that which is beautiful and deep. It’s as if the stories we write are a symbol from Him of how deeply connected He felt when He created our world, when He created us.

Maybe a sappy post, but if it makes you think then my goal is accomplished.

Sincerely,

            Yours Truly

The Exposition Junkyard

Most stories have backstories that explain why the main story is happening to begin with. That’s how life is – there’s a history to everything, even little things (like why I decided I wanted pizza for dinner instead of chicken enchiladas). Some histories are intriguing, the kind you would actually want to know. Others (such as my pizza story) are of little interest to anyone, sometimes even the people involved.

With a good novel, you want a nice, clean-cut backstory. Easy to explain; easy to comprehend. Even with a complicated backstory, as most full-length novels include, you want it kept to a minimum of details. Otherwise, your audience will go crazy trying to figure it all out. Trying to decide how to tell your audience the backstory is the tricky part. And it’s an issue I struggled with in chapter two of my novella.

The easiest, most convenient way to fill in the audience is to just dump a load of information on them and hope they don’t crumble beneath it. As goes my favorite line in The Great Muppet Caper, "It's plot exposition. It has to go somewhere."

This happens most often when you’re writing a shorter story. You don’t have enough time to unravel the backstory slowly, as in Charles Dickens’ Little Dorrit (which literally stretched the suspense over the entire novel). Maybe your audience needs to know right away what’s going on. And that’s when it turns into a monster and you start trying to dump it anywhere it will fit.

The favorite trick of every writer is to cover your tracks in a swamp of info infested dialogue, what I like to call the exposition junkyard. That, my friends, is where stories go to die. If you leave your backstory rotting there, your story will not be interesting to anybody but you (and possibly that close-knit group of friends who also have this problem in their novels and hope saying they like yours will get you to endorse theirs).

Allow me to give you an example of the exposition junkyard. Let’s say there’s been a murder involving royalty in one of my make believe country. That murder and all the politics involved are key to the things that happen during the rest of the novel. But I’m not sure where and when I should inform the audience about what’s going on. So I cram the important pieces of plot exposition into a dialogue section, hoping that the dialogue will disguise the information and make it digestible. Here’s how it turns out:

“It certainly is a beautiful day, Jane.”

“Yes. If only it wasn’t also the anniversary of my beloved uncle’s murder. He died four years ago. But the whole kingdom is still mourning his death, even the peasants.”

“I remember hearing about it. That poor man was stabbed ten times. It’s no wonder your father, the Grand Duke, won’t allow any suitors inside his tenth-generation castle without the royal guard nearby.”

“It’s the war between Sulsbury and Dellenvere that has me worried. My uncle’s death made the people of Sulsbury hate us, sworn allies of the Dellenvere people – a race that has degenerated too much to still keep an alliance with us, the people of Orlan.”

“Never mind, Jane. We will forget all of this tonight at the ball, where your sweet, innocent, beautiful sixteen-year-old sister, Alice, will at last join you after two years of waiting for her coming of age.”

“Yes. Poor Alice. Father has kept her behind palace walls since my uncle’s death, worrying about her safety. And because of this, the people of Orlan begin to fear him too much. A wise ruler should not invoke that much fear in his people – unless he wishes to be like the Earl of Sulsbury, who rules by fear alone and whose empire is built on the horrid practice of slavery.”

…What’s wrong with this method? Succinctly put, the author is insulting the audience’s intelligence. How? By expecting them to believe this could possibly be a real conversation. It’s quite obvious from the beginning that both Jane and the unnamed friend understand the situation. So if they were to talk about this situation, they likely wouldn’t go through and remind each other of all the individual details. A keen audience will quickly find it boring, amateurish, and – well, boring.

Look at that same passage written differently, still in dialogue, but with more care given to how it was written.

“It certainly is a beautiful day, Jane.”

“Yes. I only wish it wasn’t also an anniversary.”

“If you’re referring to your uncle’s murder, then I’ll say what I’ve said a dozen times – you have to let it go. That was four years ago.”

“The rest of the realm is still mourning; what makes me any different?”

“You are the daughter of the Grand Duke. You are nobility. Can you pretend to have forgotten what weight that position holds?”

“My father doesn’t seem to care too much about my position. He only worries – about me, about Alice, about our whole family.”

“It isn’t that bad, Jane.”

“He won’t even allow any suitors inside this castle without the royal guard nearby.”

“Well, betrayal has a tendency to make leaders worry. After all, Jane, your uncle wasn’t just murdered; he was murdered by a spy of Sulsbury. And now that that horrid Earl of Sulsbury has decided to blame us for his war with those degenerate Dellenvere people – well, what leader in your father’s position wouldn’t worry”

“I still don’t understand why we have an alliance with Dellenvere. Maybe if we didn’t, Father wouldn’t have to worry as much.”

“Never mind, Jane. You need to forget all of this for tonight at least. Alice will never forgive you if you wear a sour face to her coming out.”

“Dear Alice. She’s gotten so beautiful, I can hardly believe she’s still just sixteen.”

Notice the difference? In this section, the dialogue is FLUENT – i.e., it moves along at a decent pace and doesn’t feel all broken up with choppy sentences. The information was given, but selectively. Instead of dumping it all in, I carefully chose which pieces were most important and then wrote it out as two people would actually talk about it. It still isn’t perfect; there’s ways I could improve it. But for a starting point, it isn’t bad.

Now that the foundation has been set, I can include the other pieces (the Earl’s practice of slavery, the fact that Jane’s people are called the Orlan, Alice’s life behind castle walls) as filler material for other conversations or even for narrative later on. Splitting up the information not only keeps the audience from a severe headache, but also allows the other characters in the story to have a key role in exposition.

Well, there it is, folks – the first step in avoiding the exposition junkyard. Now I’m off to see if I can apply this post to that novella of mine…

Sincerely,

            Yours Truly

This Side of the Novel

I recently finished writing the first draft of my first “real” novel (as in one that I intend to try to publish). It’s technically a “novella”, not a novel. But all technicalities aside, it’s my book; it’s my story; and I’m genuinely excited about finally having the finished manuscript in my computer hard drive. This is the part of writing that I REALLY enjoy – the part where I sit back, peruse at leisure, edit as I want to. No pressure. No hassle. Just the completion of my work.

At least, that’s how it started out. That was before I realized that I wasn’t doing my job right. Or how I thought I was supposed to be doing my job right. If that’s confusing, allow me to clarify. Ahem…

One of the main corrections I constantly receive from other writers about my writing is that I am too wordy. I tend to write from a classical perspective, as if I was Charles Dickens or Jane Austen. I forget that the modern novel isn’t supposed to read like a nineteenth century, five-and-a-half inches thick, leather-bound, gold-lettered classic. It’s supposed to be MY story. And too often I lose my writer’s voice in a flood of flowery words that, while pretty, are boring to read.

And so one of the main pieces of advice I constantly receive (from these other writers who love me enough to keep reading my stories even though I continue to ignore their advice subconsciously) is to cut out wordiness. Delete every extra word I can find; get rid of description I don’t need; stop saying the same thing multiple times in different ways; etc., etc., etc.

When I sat down to do my first rewrite of this particular novel, that was my main goal. I was going to rip it to shreds, burn up the extras, and bury them where no one would be bothered with them again. As I wrote, though, I noticed that I wasn’t losing word count. It was staying at a relatively stable level. I was deleting plenty of words. What was my problem?

Then I read over several key paragraphs (each of which I had almost entirely rewritten). They were about the same length as when I had first written them. But they read so much smoother and more – well, readable.

That was when I discovered the true meaning of rewriting. Maybe it isn’t always about cutting down word count (even though there comes a point when you honestly have too many words to fit in). Maybe it’s more about what words are making up your word count.

Are the words you writing telling rather than showing? Are they distracting your audience instead of adding to your scene ? Are they to impress or simply to extend your word count? Are they describing something about a character that you’ve already described already (possibly several times)?

Or...

Are they enhancing the story? Setting the scene? Drawing your reader in? Giving your characters depth?

If the aforementioned is true…consider leaving your word count alone! It may not be the problem with your novel. And if it isn’t, chopping up your word count for that word count’s sake alone is going to hurt your story more than it will help it. From the girl who has spent the past week worrying over the fact that her word count wasn’t drastically dropping, take one piece of advice: remember that not every first draft is horrible; accept when it is horrible and when it's not; and ultimately seek to enhance your novel during a rewrite, not to fit only one element of editing. (It will cause much less frustration!)

Sincerely,

Yours Truly

My Introductory Post (and my many disclaimers)

When I first came up with a name for this blog, I wondered if it was really a good name. It’s more of a catchphrase than anything. Not something that sounds exceptionally professional. Then I heard myself say it to someone in a conversation – without meaning to. It just applied to the situation. That’s when I realized that it was the perfect name for this blog and what it represents – a writer who needs a space to rant about things non-writer people just don’t get.

My first disclaimer is this: I am not a follow-through type person.

I’m the one who comes up with ideas, not the one that finishes them. I’m the one who forgets the details but can create a perfect preparatory outline. Thus it follows that the posts on this blog will be in keeping with my personality – lengthy, sporadic, and very, very passionate. They will also be all about writing (hence the blog title). Character development, genre discussion, ideas to fix writer’s block, maybe even a little worldview here and there. Anything that has to do with writing fiction. You name it; I’ll be posting it.

A blog is usually a place to discuss something you’re passionate about, not a place to be eloquent (as proved by the way I ended that sentence with a preposition). So I hereby launch my second disclaimer: my classical-style narrative prose will not be present on this blog.

Yeah, sure, I might get a little flowery here and there. But anyone who is a writer will tell you that sometimes it’s nice to just write as yourself, not as your narrator. And that’s what this blog is all about – a place for me to write as the crazy, dancing, random song singing writer that I am. Ergo, as potent as these posts should be, no expectations should be raised about the quality of writing herein.

(I also hope you will not judge my writing abilities based on typos, grammatical errors or temporary insanity included in these posts; it’s a blog, people, not a New York City publishing house!)

And now for my third disclaimer – I am a full-time housewife.

Most people assume that because of my occupation I should have plenty of time to myself to write whatever I want whenever I want. For anyone who thinks that – you have another think coming! (And yes, that is the correct way to say that phrase.) I work at home, which means…I WORK. My plate is full with a house that has to be run, family and friends that I have to keep up with, a dog that is sweet but demanding, and actual books to be written (not to mention a husband that prefers talking to me when I’m NOT bent over a notebook or squinting with bloodshot eyes at a computer screen).

All of that to say, I will likely be very sporadic with these posts. Most of them will be written when something brilliant comes to mind and I have to write about it. Others will come out of what I happen to be studying in my writer’s research for books. Still others may be request posts from friends, maybe even followers of this blog.

Whatever they are about and however they come about (not to mention whenever they get written), these blogs are the overflow of my intense, ever-finding-new-inspiration writer’s mind. And I hope that you can enjoy it because of this. Maybe even in spite of it. Either way. Liberty hall!

In conclusion, allow me to sum up: This blog is hereby dedicated to my overactive brain and offered forthwith to any writers who care to follow it. Blog posts will be strictly in relation to fiction, whether book or film. And be forewarned – I am a Christian and I take the Bible as the ultimate authority on all subjects (yes, even writing). Thus any and all posts will be written from a conservative, Biblical perspective.

If you’re still reading, I hope it means you’re interested and that you’ll be following, ‘cause I’m really excited about this blog! As I’ve said, posts may be published at random and will likely follow no specific order. But they’ll be written from inspiration, not obligation (if I can help it) and will hopefully inspire you, as well.

I look forward to all the crazy writer’s things I can discuss in 2014! (And to not losing my audience in the process.)