Something I rarely do

...talk about a book I've just read.

So, y'know how TRoRS has a genderless narrator, dubbed 'N', for 'Nameless' by a writing buddy who waded through the first-draft ugliness (you deserve several medals, Alcar).

Well, frequently when I've talked with other YA writers about TRoRS, they've asked me a variation of the same question/statement:

"Oh, you mean like David Levithan's book, 'Every Day', right?"

And every time, I've answered, "no." The first time I'd even heard of it was after that writing buddy (who dubbed my MC 'N') read my first draft and told me about the existence of 'Every Day'.

No, it was not an influence/inspiration. I could write another novel (well, maybe a novella) about the true inspirations, but I'm not going to. 90% of the point of TRoRS was to let the reader take control and make the 'world off the page' their own. N being genderless wasn't the point of the story, it was simply a vehicle to add freedom to the reader's experience.

Yes, I certainly like the idea of someone reading TRoRS twice and switching N's gender the second time, but that's a whole other conversation in itself, and not important for this particular post.


Because I kept getting asked about 'Every Day', I purposefully put off reading it because I didn't want to go into edits (of my own story) with this idea of comparison hanging over my brain.

So, today I read 'Every Day' and the companion story, 'Six Days Earlier'*.

And I'm glad I finally read it because it is absolutely nothing like TRoRS, so part of my 'gladness' is that it puts to rest any sense of fear that I was somehow writing a version of something already out there, which is silly, I know that. But fear isn't logical.

And even though I'm talking about a book I just read, I'm still not going to talk about whether I liked it or not.

I think the biggest thing I took away from 'Every Day' (other than letting go of that irrational fear) is that it made me think a lot about writing.

The notion of waking up every day in a new body, knowing/understanding some things, but having to make up the rest, pretend to be someone else in an unfamiliar skin, to me, this was probably the best description I could ever think of to explain what it feels like to be a writer.

As I followed A's journey, A's experiences in every new body, those A connected with and those that A wanted to escape, even a second sooner, that's often how I think about characters, stories, etc.

There are characters/stories that flash through my head and I don't want to stay in them, with them. I don't want their history, future, or even anything more than a couple moments of their present.

And there are those that deeply connect and make me want to wake up with them every morning and fall asleep with them every night. I want the complicated mess rather than a shallow encounter.

And I suppose it's the same way with reading other books. Some fit right away and I fall into the world, and some itch and scratch and keep reminding me that this isn't right, that it's not for me.

So yes, I'm glad I finally read it, for many reasons.


Has anyone else read 'Every Day'? Any thoughts on it? Or any other book that really made you think, or changed your opinion on something?




*One thing I found interesting about 'Six Days Earlier' is that there's an author's note right at the beginning in which A is referred to as male.

Why I don't review books

I have a brain-wrenching quandary.

Ever since I started hanging out online and chatting about writing, I've had a clear policy of not talking about books I've read.

There are three main reasons for this.

#1) I find it incredibly disrespectful to dump on something I don't like because it might be someone else's favourite thing in the world, and because the (in this case) author worked darn hard to get their book in print.

#2) As part of the whole respect-thing, I will never lie or exaggerate. If someone respects me enough to ask a question, I want to respect them enough give them an honest answer. I want to own my words.

 #3) I (unfortunately) know myself.

The first one is easy. It's pretty self-explanatory. Disrespecting others is about the one thing that snaps my usually calm/patient state of mind and has, on the rare occasion, gotten me so furious that I can't speak/articulate a single word. I could write an entire post (or several) on why I care so much about respect/disrespect, but it boils down to: when you disrespect someone, you're essentially treating them as less-human than yourself, which is a very slippery slope upon which can be found the greatest atrocities in human history.

But let's avoid a hearty dose of over-analysis for today, yes?

And the second reason is also pretty clear. I'm not going to talk-up a book I didn't particularly like. I might suggest it to someone who I think will like the book, but I will avoid talking about my own reading experience.

So what do I mean with the third reason?

I (unfortunately) know myself.

From #1 & #2, you should be able to guess that I don't want to talk about books I have not liked.

So that narrows the potential list to review and leaves the books I tolerated, I liked, and I loved.

All of which come down to personal taste. "Would I have it again?"

...and I'm not shy about admitting I may have bad taste.

Because the things I like, the books I am attracted to are... strange. Or the reasons I am attracted to them are strange.

Like, I've read Bram Stoker's 'Dracula' probably 50+ in my life and it is one of my favourite books, but probably not for a reason anyone else likes it...

I love that, through the entire book, no character ever tries to sympathize/reason with him. They simply label him as a monster (which I'm not arguing, he is, and that's awesome), but at the time when Dracula was written, most intelligent people still judged those from other cultures as sub-humans and sought to destroy them with the same level of dedicated arrogance as Van Helsing & co set out to destroy Dracula.

I have a set of world mythology books published by professors from Yale/Harvard/Oxford/etc in the early 1900's where they consistently refer to other cultures/people as barbaric, etc and how difficult (and necessary) it was to 'civilize' them. That's only a hundred years ago...

So, assuming Dracula is a monster, sub-human, and not worth trying to empathize/reason with, fits perfectly in with the world-view at the time. It's a nearly-honest, non-white-washed, non-PC-glossed glimpse into how people actually thought about those outside their culture at the time.

Now... to anyone out there who's read "Dracula", is that something you noticed, or cared about? And for those who haven't read it... does that even remotely entice you to read it? ...I'm guessing "no".

Let me reiterate that I read it for the first time when I was 9, and I couldn't articulate all of this back then... but I did ask myself why they didn't just talk to Dracula. So even way back then, this was the odd reason I connected to the book and the reason I re-read it... because I couldn't understand why they didn't just sit down and have a conversation. It seemed the obvious thing to do.

I almost never lend books to other people because usually the books are returned... unfinished. Most of the books I love and re-read,no one has ever heard of. But I don't really care. Just like I want to own my words without being ashamed, I also want to own the things I love without being ashamed.

Which makes me want to write reviews for books I love...

...but...

I like books for weird reasons. Like a character who is creepily OCD. Or the author is amazing at playing with words to create sentences that have multiple meanings. For clever description. For philosophy, for irrationality, for humour, for the way words are strung together so they look good, or sound good or taste good. I like books that are so ridiculous that they hit a level of absurdity that's baffling. Characters who are arrogant, or dense, or broken. I like seeing how skillful an author is at emotionally or psychologically manipulating readers. And subtext... shovel on the subtext and I will revel in it :)

There's no set reason why I like a book, other than, maybe, it gets me to look at something from a new angle. Good, or bad.

Now, add in the fact that I'm prone to over-analysis...

...so if I wrote a book review...

...and focused on what I liked...

Like, analyzing the use of 'I' in 1st POV. Or cataloguing the use/frequency of colours. Or how the author uses a specific word which manipulates the reader into thinking "x". Or how I like the taste of a set of letters/sounds/words in a particular sentence. How the order/arrangement of a couple lines can completely change the subtext. Or the progression/arc of emotional intelligence or self-awareness in a side character.


...can you imagine the result?

Well, most likely any potential readers' eyes would glaze over and they would die of boredom. The things I seem to like and care about are not generally things that others are interested in. Thus, not enticing others to buy my favourite books... which would be the opposite of what I set out to do.


And therein lies the quandary. How to go about sharing books I love, while being honest/true about why I loved them, yet also succeeding in not actually scaring people away...

Suggestions? Advice? Thoughts?

(other than I'm crazy and you feel the intense need to run far, far away)





As a curiosity, here's a random/short list of some of my favourite non-YA books. Three gold stars for anyone who has heard of, or read, more than two of these:


Edward Carey's "Observatory Mansions" and "Alva & Irva"
Jostein Gaarder's "The Solitaire Mystery" and "Sophie's World"
Helen Oyeyemi's "Icarus Girl"
Banana Yoshimoto's "Amrita" (and nearly everything else she's written)
Elizabeth McClung's "Zed"
Catherynne Valente's "Orphan's Tales" (books 1 & 2)
Nicholas Christopher's "A Trip to the Stars" and "Veronica"
James Thurber's "The Thirteen Clocks"
Kris Kenway's "Bliss Street" and "Too Small for Basketball"
Lulu Wang's "The Lily Theatre"
Joe Coomer's "Beachcombing for a Shipwrecked God" and "A Pocketful of Names"
Sean Dixon's "The Girls Who Saw Everything"
Stephen Walker's "Danny Yates Must Die"
Jim Munroe's "Angry Young Spaceman"
Emma Donoghue's "Room"

Probably the last one, Emma Donoghue's "Room", is the only one you've likely heard of/read.

Rituals

I've been thinking a lot about rituals.

We all have them, but it's easiest to recognize the big ones like religious, cultural, or holiday-related (not necessarily religious*), but we all have smaller rituals as well that infest our daily lives.

Maybe because I've always been crazy interested in cultures/mythology/etc, I tend to think about rituals more than most. It's not the elaborate ceremonies (although death rituals around the world is always a fun topic to Google) that I love, but the small series of actions that are repeated over and over until they become habit, or are even passed on to become traditions at a certain point.

When I moved away from the lower mainland for the first time, I purposefully started a ritual to maintain contact with my mom and sister. In that case it was the resurrection of a childhood tradition. Even though we all now live within a 20 minute drive of each other, we still do it. Not every month, but when one of us does remember, it packs a lifetime of shared memories and laughter into a single 10 word text message.

...and I'm going to break my rule a tiny bit here... since I generally make it a point not to talk about/name the books I've read.

You can tell when a book is written by a person who spent 10 minutes and Wiki'd a city/culture versus someone who has actually lived there, or has taken the time to research it in depth. A Wiki'd story feels shallow/flat, like the 'Coles-notes' version. A veneer thinly spread and easy to chip if you pick at it a little.

"Drift", by MK Hutchins is a good example of a book that does not feel Wiki'd. I know the mythology was based on Mayan/Aztec, but it was entirely its own thing... so layered, so textured that I wanted to crawl into the world and live there.

A non-YA book I love is "Bliss Street", by Kris Kenway, who actually moved/stayed in Beirut for a year or so while writing the book. It's full of these tiny moments, tiny peculiarities and details that make the book a much richer experience and you can really feel how alien these are to the main character, a British citizen temporarily stranded in Beirut.

Whenever I read a book like this, where I can really get a taste of the world, I get insta-writer-crush. Especially when authors use rituals to not only world-build, but manage stuff like this.

Rituals give depth and, I think, especially with fantasy books (meant as an umbrella term, including, but not limited to: magic, alternate world, steampunk, alternate history, dystopian, etc), it's too easy to fall back on our own familiar patterns rather than step back, take a look at the world we've built, and create some new rituals/traditions to fit. I've read many fantasy books where I have been disappointed that the flavours were too North American (sorry, is that understandable?).

Often this is because writers are imposing their own personal thoughts/morals/ethics/etc on these fantastical worlds. They have a certain tone of modern-judgement, especially when the stories involve things like arranged marriages, slavery, etc.

...but it's in the smaller things as well. Subtle things like gestures related to local superstitions or religions. How people greet each other. Eating rituals or what they snack on. How respect or rudeness is conveyed. What's joked about and what's taboo.

It's all the tiny everyday details that really enrich a story and make it feel 'real' instead of flat.

It's easier to notice rituals in Fantasy because they can be quite different from what's familiar to us, but I think rituals are just as important in contemporary books. They just aren't as noticeable.

Often small rituals evolve to centre a person, so they can be a great device to show the emotional state of a character.

To use a (perhaps) familiar example? (so I'm not spoiling other people's enjoyment of other books by over-analyzing them to death)

Triss, from TRoRS, licks her lips when she's putting on the pretence of confidence. So, before she tells a lie, to someone else, or to herself. When she's preparing to do something she doesn't want to. When she's unsure of a decision she's about to make. In times like that, she licks her lips.

Similarly to how some girls chronically check their makeup. Or someone might adjust their clothes or wipe their hands (to check for sweat).

These are all tiny, self-soothing rituals. A preparing of the mind and the body. Some may start out as intentional (like checking make-up to be battle-ready) some not so intentional. I, for example, have a bad habit of cracking my fingers/wrists/elbows/knees... for a similar reason as someone might wipe their hands... I'm nervous and it's a self-soothing ritual to break my own tension/anxiety. Sometimes I do it semi-intentionally because I know it shocks people -> so it's a good way to break the tension of an awkward silence, or to get a laugh (or shiver of disgust).

Just to be clear, what I'm talking about is different from a character-specific beats/actions** to modify dialogue... y'know, like how you shouldn't have more than one character always rolling their eyes or running a hand through their hair*** while speaking... those are often meaningless, other than making dialogue a little more visually interesting. They don't necessarily have an emotional/psychological reason behind them.


In the case of Triss, she also has her driving rituals, her music rituals, her drinking rituals, her weird-condiment rituals, and more. Some of which are intentional, some not so much, but all ingrained in her life to make her feel more in control.

Because that's what rituals do. Even if it's only in our minds.

Triss' rituals are all repeated series of actions/behaviour that make her (perhaps) a far richer character than N (the main character) since N is observing Triss' behaviours and is less aware of any self/personal rituals (though they do exist).

But that's fun too... because rituals so often become habits and we cease to notice our own until someone else points them out (like my joint-cracking-thing).


And y'know what, maybe this is just something that I like, that I care about. And I'm fine with that.

No matter what, I'm still going to get writer-crushes on authors who layer their stories with habits, rituals, etc.

...and I'm going to write characters this way too.

...and I don't care if anyone else notices them.****

I get to be selfish like that :)

Write what you love, yes?



What about you? What do you think about rituals, either in your own life, or those in stories? Can you recommend any books where you've noticed repeated actions/behaviours used as subtext to hint of a character's emotional state, or books where you've really been impressed by the depth of the world-building?


Hmmm, I also am super interested in totems/items of great sentimentality... but there's been enough nerdy-ponderings for one post, so I'll leave that for another day :)





* As a kid, the Christmas Eve ritual/tradition would involve homemade clam chowder, opening one gift which would always be new pyjamas, then my sister and I posing in front of the fireplace/stockings wearing the new pjs. Seriously... like even as teenagers we had to stand there and get our picture taken (less giddy smiles, more eye-rolling, but still...)

** There's probably a better/more specific term for this, but it's late (will do a quick dyslexic-error-hunt tomorrow before posting) and I'm tired :p Anyone who knows the term, please tell me in the comments (I love hearing when/where I'm wrong)

*** OR, the one I hate the most... the dreaded eyebrow or lip 'quirk'. If I see this more than a couple times, I will not read another book by that author. Seriously, I am not kidding. Especially if every character's face is quirking... gah!

**** Seriously, a crate full of virtual cookies to anyone who can name N's rituals. There are 3 major ones that repeat a lot and several smaller ones as well. Okay, I'll give you the most obvious one: repeating the rules when stressed out/uneasy/afraid.

All better now

Order has been returned to the universe.

I'm amazed at how much smaller (and thinner!) the Paperwhite is compared to my old Kindle.

...but I'm also amazed at how long it takes to re-do all the organization. Too bad that information isn't stored online... and when there's over 350 books to sort through, it's difficult to remember what folder/category they all originally went in.

Rest in Peace/Pieces, Kindle

It's an open secret that I love my Kindle, my very old 2nd generation Kindle... that's right, it came out in February, 2009.

This thing has taken a beating. Just to clarify, I don't use it to discipline my dog, or other drivers who refuse to 'stay right except to pass' on the highway... what I mean is, I've burned out 1 Macbook and 2 Macbook Pro laptops since I've had the Kindle.

It was repaired at one point, 'cause the screen went wonky, but this thing has been great. The screen is chipped, the plastic casing is cracked in several places, but it would not die.

Until last night.

Soft & hard resets did nothing, and I eventually did crack open the back and pushed a pen into the 'reset' hole inside. Yeah, technically that voids the warrantee, but I'm pretty sure that warrantee ran out four years ago.

Unfortunately, my Frankensteinian ambitions were for naught.

So, rest in peace, fair Kindle.

I promise to love your replacement as faithfully as I did you.

 Before the hard reset...

...and after. Doesn't look too healthy, does it?

English language = :-(

Why does the english language get a sad face?

Well, mostly 'cause someone who likes to laugh at me, almost as much as I like to laugh at myself, sent me this today:


1) The bandage was wound around the wound.

2) The farm was used to produce produce.

3) The dump was so full that it had to refuse more refuse.

4) We must polish the Polish furniture.

5) He could lead if he would get the lead out.

6) The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.

7) Since there is no time like the present, he thought it was time to present the present.

8) A bass was painted on the head of the bass drum.

9) When shot at, the dove dove into the bushes.

10) I did not object to the object.

11) The insurance was invalid for the invalid.

12) There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.

13) They were too close to the door to close it.

14) The buck does funny things when the does are present.

15) A seamstress and a sewer fell down into a sewer line.

16) To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.

17) The wind was too strong to wind the sail.

18) Upon seeing the tear in the painting I shed a tear.

19) I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.

20) How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?

FYI, they obviously forgot about bow/bow, and a few others, but it's still fun :)

Reading + writing?

I've seen many times online how people say they don't read while they're writing for fear of (unconsciously) adopting pieces of what they're reading, including the voice/style of another author.

Now, I don't read while writing... but it has nothing to do with fear. I just suck at multitasking, and am not afraid to admit it ;)

Writing takes up too much brain space to allow for much of anything else (yes, yes, here's the spot to insert/comment/send me dumb-blonde jokes), and when I'm in writing-mode, the dog needs to perform a pretty remarkable tango to snap me out of that writing-mode and remind me of the fact that she isn't actually capable of using indoor plumbing.

When I first read (several years ago) about being afraid of adopting other writers' style/voice/etc, my reaction was... "Seriously?"

Because that just doesn't compute...

But then I kept hearing/reading the same thing.

I think it would take a lot of work to write in a voice other than my own... to change my style, to merge/meld with another. Maybe I'm just lazy? Maybe my dyslexic-brain can't switch gears to a new track? Sure, I can draw in any number of different styles, but I like my own. I like the lines and shapes my pencil automatically follows when I'm sketching/doodling. Writing my own voice/style is just as easy. I don't think, I just do.

But what do you guys think?

To you, is this a legitimate fear, and if so, why/how?

I get that, when you analyze something you like, how you can use it as a tool to *improve* your own writing, but I wouldn't consider that *adopting*. I'd call that learning. That's how/why I can draw in so many different styles. You analyze, you learn, you re-create, you move on and integrate it into your own thing.

Yup, I totally thought those sharp Anime/Manga styled noses from the 80's & 90's were ridiculous until I figured out *why* they're drawn that way.


A little while ago, I kinda ranted about 'kick-ass-female-characters' because I read 6 books within a couple of days where the lead female characters were near carbon-copies of each other. Does that mean any of those authors were *adopting* from each other? Or from an earlier book?

If every story has been already told a thousand times, and all that makes us interesting is our own, unique take on the tired, regurgitated plots & character archetypes, then where do you think the line is?

Do you read while you write? If you don't, why?

Still at the cabin, reading, not-yet writing, and a link

The first piece of the title is self-explainitory, and I'm looking forward to swimming today since, just getting off of the long, Canada Day weekend, the lake has been choked with boats stirring up the water so much, its been impossible to go for any long swims without drinking half the lake :)

I read 2 books yesterday. Both excellent. Oh wait... No, I read three, and the first was entirely forgettable. Definitely not in the 'I would have this again' category.

...and I'm still trying to puzzle my way through a sticky plot point... How DOES Jay convince Kell to be his model?

Strangely enough, I think my own pantsing style can be sort of explained by this this post.

The double-helix thing... Yeah, that's how I write. It's why I don't move forward in plot until I know what the next step in the character's emotional arc will be.

...and with Kell, I still don't quite know what she wants...

I think that double-helix thing may also be why I have little to no interest in some books. When the plot seems divorced from the character arc, it really does feel like there are two different stories on the page, and with no emotional connection to explain personal motivation, the characters often seem as lively as checkers pieces, faceless, nearly interchangeable blobs of molded plastic, hopping and sliding across a board to the author's will.

Anyways, go read the linked post as its far better than anything I could type out on my phone...

Kicking the ass of kick-ass female characters

I know it's an old post, and I'm sure many of you have already familiar with it, but I just stumbled across this a few days ago and it's been on my mind ever since.

Please, if you haven't read it, go read it now before you continue because I'm not going to bother quoting large chunks of text.


I'm delighted to have regained enough stability in my own brain to read again, and in the last three days, I've torn through 4.5 books, three of which have kick-ass female main characters.

As in, they 'literally' kick a hell-of-a-lot of ass during the course of the book.

But looking at the 'figurative' kick-ass side of things, they sit at varying points on the whole "strong character, female" scale.

Total number of villains defeated does not a strong character make :)

In keeping with my policy of avoiding negativity, I'm not going to give you the names of the books, or the characters.

After all, I'm not interested in putting down things that I personally don't like, when I know lots of people do like them, and the authors worked long and hard to see their work published.

My opinion is only that. Mine.

Three of the books I've read are very similar: fantastical world building (meant as an umbrella term, including, but not limited to: magic, alternate world, steampunk, alternate history, dystopian, etc), clear villains with clearly evil intentions, each female is "amped-up" in some abnormal/extraordinary way, each female character is involved (to varying degrees) in a love-triangle with a 'good boy' and a 'bad boy', each is described as beautiful, and each wears a lot of pretty/interesting clothes during the course of each book.*

All three are also first books in popular series (I admit, I haven't checked to see if they are all trilogies/etc).

If we roll out the familiar notion that there are no 'new ideas', only recycled ones, these three books make a good example, because so many of the basic elements are the same.

I'm sure most of you are familiar with the Bechdel test? To pass/fail, the basic three criteria are:

1) If a work of fiction has 2 or more (named) female characters

2) If they talk to each other

3) If they talk about something other than a man

I'd like to throw another few criteria into the pot to determine whether a a female character is a "kick-ass female character", or a "kick-ass character, female":

1) If there isn't a specific comment/line about how the FMC (female main character) has never gotten along with, nor ever had any good female friends in the past

2) If she doesn't insult/belittle/put down 'regular' girls (as in, the ones she couldn't/doesn't get along with), often specifically referring to them as 'silly', or otherwise insulting their intelligence and choices (most notably, marriage)

3) If she doesn't feel an immediate kinship with the one other female character who is somehow 'different' from 'regular' girls.

4) If another (beautiful) female character vying for one of the FMC's love interests isn't deceitful, wicked, vain, a liar, or somehow morally corrupt and/or in league with the villain.

5) If the description ratio regarding the FMC's clothes isn't vastly skewed when compared to description of any other person, place, thing in the entire story

6) If the first introduction of male characters (notably, love interests) isn't dominated by physical descriptions of how attractive (physically) they are

7) If, during those introductions, the FMC's first thoughts aren't primarily about her own appearance and whether or not she's looking her best

8) If she can interact with either male lover, for any duration of time, and think more about his inner/good qualities than his outer/physical ones

9) If she can keep her mind on defeating the bad guy without being constantly distracted by a male love interest taking his shirt off (or some variation of that point)

Do those sound like reasonable things to look for? I can't tell you how many of these show up in YA novels, and let me say now that one of the three books failed on every single one of these points.

Now, I'm not saying books should never include any of these things, what I am saying is that when the main female character of a book spends more time thinking about her clothes, her men, and her appearance than anything else (especially saving the world), then it's time to have a good, hard look at whether that can be considered a "kick-ass character, female", or a "kick-ass female character".

What do you think about this subject? Do you agree with my criteria or not? Do you have any to add of your own?



*small, additional note: these characters almost all have amazing healing abilities so their perfect faces aren't permanently marred while they are kicking (literal) ass. Only one received permanent scars, but notably, not on her perfect face :)

Yes, I am Canadian (and I might be a little crazy)

I disappeared good, didn't I?

Well, I figured since so many bloggers were heavily involved in the A-Z challenge that no one would be the wiser if I slipped away for a bit of offline-down-time.

One thing I did... went back to Victoria and packed up/moved all my stuff. Well, most of it. I left about 1/2 my books, 1/2 my movies, all my sports gear (except my beloved Sims snowboard), and after a tragically long day of packing/movers, and the pond pump not working (so we ended up in the water bailing by hand), successfully managed to catch and transport 11 out of my 16 koi. They are now living happily in my parent's pond.

This past week I escaped to the family cabin.

It's on a little lake about 2 hours out of downtown Vancouver. I love going there. After driving out of the city, you hit the valley with farms/etc, then wind through the foothills a bit. My grandfather built the place when my mom was a little kid. "Rustic" would be the polite term for the place ;)

There was electricity, but I think I was around 7 or 8 when we finally got water... before that, if you wanted to cook/clean/etc, you had to walk down and draw a bucket of water from the lake. I was 13 or 14 when they finally installed a hot water tank, and a shower! Yup, washing your hair meant jumping in the lake, climbing onto the dock, scrubbing up, and jumping back in.

With no tv, no internet, and in a small town where there's not a whole heck of a lot to do, I managed to do a couple things I haven't been able to do for months: read (3 full YA books and a short/accompanying story to one of those books), and write (about 1,500 words on the Jay/Kell story).

Farms on the right, foothills up front. If I had aimed my phone a little to the right, you'd be able to see an amazingly clean/huge view of Mt. Baker (in Washington State)

Here's winding through the foothills... though you can't really see the big hill on the left, on the right, there are all these amazing seasonal waterfalls which pour down the melting snow each spring

 Ahhh... on the deck, 20 C (68 F), and that lake couldn't have melted before yesterday... No, I'm serious. It was frozen solid in January, and just a week before I went to the cabin, there was a fresh dump of snow that went half-way down that mountain! While Eva (as you can see) was good to wander around on the deck, Berkeley contented himself with hiding under the cabin and hunting tasty spiders. Cats :D He's used to wearing a harness/being tied up outside, and he's been to the cabin a number of time, but this was only Eva's second visit.

 Morning view from the deck of the cabin, around 9am. Seriously, can it get better than this? Truly a perfect moment to pause, consider, and feel blessed by the good in my life rather than focusing on the bad. Even coffee tastes better with this view.

The very first batch of new Canadian geese! These two parents were hanging out around the dock all week (on and off), and on my final day, I guess their little ones were finally strong enough to take their first tour of the lake. Pretty cool... though Canadian geese are noisy suckers, destroy lawns (hence the fence in the previous picture), and can be pretty vicious. By my count, I think there are 16 babies... but it's hard to tell with them all clumped up together, and zooming in on my phone isn't the best :p

Oh, the being crazy part I mentioned? I swam in the lake every day I was there, except the very first day. And no, not in a wetsuit or a drysuit. More than one neighbour wandered down to check it out... more than one called me crazy (or just thought it strongly enough that you could plainly read it on their face). I was smart though, limiting it to 20 min max because you lose body heat so fast in water that cold that it can be dangerous. The water was so cold it tasted of metal, but I still had a fun time swimming around and diving off the dock. I do love swimming ;)

Anyways, that's where I've been, and while I may not be fully healed, at least I've got a bit of my charge back now ;) I am already planning to commandeer the cabin again for at least a week in June and hope to get a good chunk of writing done ;)

Hope you all are doing well! Now it's time to leash up Eva and take her out for walkies ;)

Recycling "Archie"

You guys already know that I love comic books.

When I was around 8 or 9, I discovered Archie Comics, and read them voraciously until I was around 14. I literally had hundreds, to the point where they filled one of those big gym duffle bags when I "donated" them to a younger cousin who I was quite close to (Gator*, I've written about him before...).

I had so many, and had read them so many times, that after several years, it started to bother me because they would recycle so many of the stories. One year, actually just a few years ago, my parents bought me an Archie comic to put in my Christmas stocking, kindof as a joke, and I was delighted! But, when I opened it up, every single story was recycled/reprinted, even though the book was brand new. I had read them all... even with a more-than-decade-gap between my last Archie comic purchase.

But it was still really cool that they bought it for me.

My toughest teenage years were between the summer of Grade 8 and the end of Grade 9. Sure, Grades 10 & 11 were not a lot of fun either, (Grade 12 was pretty okay), but that year-and-a-half span were ones I never want to live again. Like, suicidal-thoughts-every-day kinda bad. That time period is the one I pull from when I write... which probably explains why my stories (and characters) are pretty dark.

One of the bright points I had to hang onto was coming home, always exhausted because school had gotten noticeably harder and all the 'dyslexic-work-arounds' that I had honed in elementary school were all failing me at once, and I would flop on my bed and read those Archie comics. The bright colours, the round and cartoony faces/figures, the silly, mindless stories... it helped me to recharge, to realize that, while school had no redeeming features, I still had somewhere I could rest mentally.**

I gave away those Archie comics when I didn't need them anymore.

And now, Gator is all grown up, has finished a music degree, is working on a second, and is living a good life. I admit, I haven't thought about those Archie comics in years. I always figured when he got bored with them, he also handed them off to someone else, or donated them to a used bookstore.

I got a surprising email from Gator's mom (my aunt) yesterday. She works within the social service/counselling world of things, in a middle school.

She emailed me, not about the comics, but to ask if I would repair a teapot my Nana had painted, because the gold was wearing away along the handle. At the end of the email, we had this conversation back and forth:

Her:

I was thinking about you today watching the kids at my school reading all your old comic books.  You would not believe how many kids have poured over those books.  When one batch of kids moves on to high school the next one comes from elementary and discovers them all over again.

It is quite a legacy.

Me:

Wow, I can't believe you still have those!!!

How nostalgic :D

Her:

I know.  It is hilarious to see the kids reading them like their lives
depended on it.  I have a lunch room where there is a big bin, another big
bin right outside of my office and a drawer full of them so I can rotate
them part way through the year if the kids have read them all.

...and I was struck by her choice of words in that last section. "...reading them like their lives depended on it..." And I wonder how many of those kids had enjoyed a moment of reprieve, just like I did, while reading those silly, mindless stories.

And I think that's so absolutely awesome... that years of my hard-earned allowance & birthday money went to these books that are still being used, still being enjoyed, and (hopefully) still being needed.

Books are a wonderful thing, but they're even better when they are shared :)



*Not his real name of course... he used to bite me when he was little, so that was my nickname for him.

**Okay, I wasn't just reading comics... in fact, I think there's a photo somewhere of me at my parents' cabin with a stack of Archie comics on one side, and a stack of books about math, history & physics on my other side. But you get my point :)

Food & books: would you have it again?

Have you ever been out for dinner with someone, and you ask, "Is that good?" and they respond, "Yes!"

Yet you notice they are picking the meal apart, cutting it into tiny bites, and trying to hide it under the garnish at the side of the plate so it looks like they've eaten more than they actually have.

Has anyone else noticed this?  Is it just a Canadian thing to never say anything bad in a restaurant?

I'm really picky about food. I have no problem modifying my order until it's nearly unrecognizable from what's listed in the menu, or sending the food back if it's not cooked properly or if it's wrong. I figure, if I'm paying for it, they should serve what I asked for. Note: I'm not rude about it, or at least I try not to be, because I know the waiter/waitress isn't the one who overcooked my fish until it's turned into a piece of shale, or undercooked the chicken breast so it's a sickly, pink in the centre.

But let's talk about when it's not a matter of being poorly prepared. What about when something is over salted, or the mixture of flavours isn't to your taste? When it's a matter of like/dislike.

Do you tell the truth when someone asks you if it's good?

I'm notoriously honest/blunt, and I still have a problem answering "no" to that question, even if I hate what's on the plate in front of me.

So I've stopped asking.

Instead of the ripe-for-a-white-lie question, "Is it good?", I ask, "Would you have that again?"

And people are more likely to answer with a real opinion rather than a dismissive "yes".

Asking if the food is good is the same as bumping into someone you haven't seen in ages and asking how they're doing. Almost always, people respond with an off-hand, throw-away phrase, or a single word answer, then move on. It's a question that is asked out of habit/politeness, and rarely answered honestly.

With food, whether it's "good" or not is almost irrelevant. It's such a vague word that it's practically meaningless, but asking if they would pay to have the same meal served to them again...? That's specific and relevant to the person you're asking.

I've been thinking of this in terms of books/authors because I recently lent a couple books to a friend of mine. We have never exchanged books before, but she asked me to give her a couple of my favourites so she could see what I liked. I also recently cleaned out my book shelves and donated about half the books to the Salvation Army.

That's a very clear division between, "I would have that/read that/pay for it again," and, "No."

Since I'm also trying to catch up on my reading while taking a writing sabbatical over the holidays, I'm also thinking a lot about this question. Specifically, because I've read so many first, or first + second books in a series/trilogy... and am deciding whether to buy/read the rest or not.

So far, the first one I've bought (book 3 in a trilogy, I'm 2/3 of the way through) is so dishearteningly disappointing that I'm leaning more towards reading stand-alone books.

If anyone has any good suggestions, please leave a comment. I like weird, dark, and complex. YA, specifically, please. Someone mentioned "The Raven Boys" as a good one, so that might be next on my to-read-list.



...and when my friend brings my books back, I'm not going to ask her if she liked them.

Instead, I'm going to ask, "Would you like to borrow another book?"

Essentially it's the same question, but the way you ask it will usually result in a completely different answer.

...but then again, maybe I'm thinking too much about "spin"...? It wouldn't be the first time my over-analytical brain went flying off on a tangent :)

What is this strange, tactile sensation...?

...oh, that's right... it's "paper".

I did something I haven't done in about two or three years.

I bought books, like physical, made-of-paper-with-printed-words kind of books.

Generally, I'm pretty laid back with most things... but I have a few odd quirks where you'd swear I was a perfect 'A' type personality.

One of those things is I'm notoriously 10 minutes early for everything.*

Another is, if I have one book in paperback, I want the rest in paperback**. I'm not talking about something semi-normal like, in a series, you have the first two books in paperback, so you feel obliged to complete the set. Nope, I buy every book that author has written in paperback.

The same holds true for my Kindle. If I first purchased an author's book digitally... there are some pretty high odds I'm going to continue on with that.

So what did I buy?

Banana Yoshimoto's latest book, "The Lake". She would be in my top-five-all-time-favourite-authors list. I've got every book she's written (which have been translated into English), even though I don't have a favourite. Her stories have such a similar dreamy flavour, they all kind of drift together in my brain.

Jostein Gaarder's semi-latest-book, "The Castle in the Pyrenees". Same as above. There is only one more of his books I've been having difficulty tracking down... "Through a Glass Darkly". One day, I assure you, it will be on my shelf... (cue maniacal laughter...***)

Antonia Michaelis' finally-in-paperback, "The Storyteller". I read her first book, "Tiger Moon", after reading a review by a North American comic artist (from San Francisco) that I quite like, and got hooked immediately. "Tiger Moon" was awesome, and I'm hoping this one will be equally enjoyable. She has one other book out... but alas! Still only in hardcover!


Other than these three, there are probably a dozen or so authors whose books I will always buy a "real" version of rather than the much easier (an more convenient for travel) Kindle version.

Sadly, I currently have an entire double-stacked bookshelf of un-read-real-books... some gathering dust for several years, including a Jostein Gaarder book my sister kindly gave me two Christmases ago.

Oddly enough, the arrival of these un-read books seem to coincide with the purchase of my Kindle...

Strange?

Suspicious?

I blame it on aliens, personally. Since that conveniently removes all blame from myself :)

Perhaps, like changing your writing space can change your writing, changing from paper to digital and back again also has further-reaching-repurcussions than I logically could imagine possible.

...but that apparently hasn't stopped me from buying these paperbacks...


And yes, I am in complete denial that there are only 2 more writing days left until NaNo is over.




* ...and you'd never want to watch me eat waffles or popcorn. It will scar you for life.

** I never buy hardcover. Hate them. They weigh a million pounds and take up too much shelf space. Of course the weight thing is mainly because, when going on vacation, I would have an entire separate suitcase filled with books that I lugged around... 1 for every day I was gone, plus 2 spares... just in case.

*** This is why you never have to worry that I will someday take over the world. My goals are rather modest, even though I can still cackle with the best of them.

TEN

I'm not a book blogger. I don't like the politics involved in definitively saying a book is good/bad because everyone's tastes are different.

Occasionally I will mention a book I have particularly enjoyed, but for the first time, I'm going to talk about a book that isn't out yet, one that I'm excited to read when it does come out on September 18th.

"TEN", by Gretchen McNeil.

And not just 'cause it comes out a few days after my birthday (which it does).

I'm looking forward to this because it's loosely based on an Agatha Christie book.

Why does this matter? Well, between the ages of eight and eleven, I spent a week of every summer at my grandparent's house slowly working my way through every single Agatha Christie book.

Yup, I've read 'em all. Even the books she wrote under a pseudonym. I've also seen the play 'Ten Little Indians' six times, and a couple of other Christie books set on stage.

So, I've been deadly curious to see how this story has been re-envisioned since I heard about it.

For those of you who love blogging about books, and those motivated by awesome prize packs, Gretchen McNeil has set up a unique system to promote this book. I hope you all pass the word around. Video about it is here.

As a writer, I highly respect the effort McNeil has gone to to increase her online presence. Not only does she have an active website, she is one of the founding members of a YA writer's vlog (video blog) channel/group that's been running for... 2 years? Maybe longer... called YA Rebels which I've been following, on and off, for well over a year. In fact, I almost quit being an anonymous/faceless blogger by auditioning to be a member when they had a call out last summer.

Too bad I was at the family cabin the week it was announced. Normally I love being forced to give up internet for a week (a nice way to re-set ones priorities), but unfortunately, being away meant I found out about the call for auditions after it was already over.

Besides, I think you'd rather look at the cute-cartoony-black-cat-face than my own mug-shot ;) Especially after I donated (nearly) all my hair last September.

Anyways, I seriously hope you guys spread the word.

Since Twitter scares the hell out of dyslexic folk such as myself, I'm not eligible to win any prizes, so this post is about all I can do, other than pre-order "TEN" on my Kindle :) So you know I'm being 100% genuine in posting/promoting this. I really hope the books sells well.



Now, SERIOUSLY, I will hide in the other room and work on 'Brake Fluid' edits... argh. Too many excellent distractions... and two not so good ones in the form of: a) a blue heron eyeing my koi pond, and b) a deer emptying out our bird feeder again... sigh. At least Eva-the-beagle gets a kick out of chasing them away...

Re-grouping, kicking down writer's block, and feral cats

After a few weeks of stutter-start work on 'Brake Fluid', I'm back at it again today.

I've been thinking a little about my recent post on description and a little about writer's block.

Usually I stop writing mid-scene because it seems to be easier to start back up again the next day. Often if I finish off a scene, then stop, the next time I sit down to write, it's like I've lost the momentum of the story and it sometimes takes up to a few days to get back in the head-space necessary to continue on.

Something I discovered though... I find it way easier to get back in the scene if I stop after a line of *good* description, OR, just before a place that needs a line like that.

And I think that's all about that necessary head-space, getting sucked into the mood/voice of the story, re-syncing with someone that's nothing like yourself.

Last time I stopped, I had a partially written scene. For explanation purposes, let's split that scene into four parts. The beginning, the escalation, the downturn, and the ending. I only had part of the downturn and part of the ending written. No beginning, no escalation, the downturn needed to be transitioned into the ending, and the ending itself needed a few more lines to finish it off.

Confusing? Yeah... I write like this a lot. Every scene is like a mini-story where I try to play with the pacing and transition between the different pieces.

The 'downturn' started with a horribly overwritten line I knew had to be dumped/re-done, but I wanted to preserve the intention behind it:

Triss gives her normal, teasing smile and pats my head. “I’ve tamed you. You don’t bite anymore.”

The ending 'ended' with the line:

I toss the butt out of the car and roll up the window. “Yeah. Let’s get this over with.”

The scene before this (well, the scene in the 'present time-line') ends mid-way through a phone-call, so I knew the beginning of this half-written scene had to finish off that plot-point, but the line it ended with (though an excellent line to end on) didn't necessarily inspire me into the right frame of mind to write.

So, I went back a couple of lines until I found this:

I nearly stutter out an apology, but Triss isn't clawing at my arm anymore. She leans back, away from the hand that’s keeping her at bay, and she wraps her fingers around mine.

She smiles. Not her genuinely real Triss smile, but something softer.

...and I re-wrote it into this:

I nearly stutter out an apology, but then Triss stops clawing at my arm. It’s not the lack of pain that shakes me back, it’s the loss of her warmth against my bare skin. She leans back, away from my outstretched hand that’s keeping her at bay, and she wraps her fingers around mine.

She smiles. Not her genuinely real Triss smile, but something softer. She curls my flared hand into a loose fist and presses it against her cheek, and I can’t look away from her eyes.

Sure, the re-write needs work still (like deleting the pesky repeated word 'back'), but it fulfilled the necessary job of syncing my brain with the MC again, and I knew how to finish off the phone plot-point and link up the disjointed pieces of the half-written scene.

Something that is really key to this particular character is how much Triss affects his/her view of the world, especially through physical stimuli.

An image I always had for this character is that of a feral animal, hence that horribly overwritten line that needed to be dumped/rewritten*.

Another thing I always keep in mind is an interesting book I once skimmed through... wow, too long ago to even suggest an accurate number of years... called 'The Five Love Languages', by Gary Chapman. I remember it being mentioned on a writing blog and I looked through it at someone's house once, but don't own it (though I keep thinking I should buy it since it was an interesting reference).

Essentially, the theory behind the book is that each person predominantly sees/views/uses one method of communication over all the others. The 'languages' are, words of affirmation, gifts, quality time, acts of service, and physical touch. If two people in a relationship are speaking different languages, they aren't getting what they need from their partner and will, most likely, feel unfulfilled and break up. Like, if one person thinks gifts show their love, and if their partner never gives them gifts because they feel quality time together is the best thing that shows their love, there's going to be resentment/conflict because they're both 'giving' but not 'receiving' what they view as most important.

The idea of physical touch being a 'language' really intrigued me, possibly because I had a feral cat as a pet at the time I skimmed through the book. This cat would sit on the doorstep looking through the glass sliding door every day for hours, but if you opened the door, she would run away. If you left the door open and walked away, she would occasionally sneak into the kitchen and, if you were sneaky, you could close the door and trap her inside. Yes, the kitchen closed off completely from the rest of the house.

Over a period of years (yes, I'm stubborn), I got to a place with this cat where we had a routine. I'd get her in the kitchen, I'd chase/trap her under the table, pick her up (her body would go completely rigid, like she was scared stiff), sit in one particular chair, and I would hold/pet her.

Does that sound mean? Maybe... but as soon as she was on my lap, she would relax. She'd even purr, rub her face against my hand, stand up and rub my face, and eventually she even loved to be brushed. She would sit there for hours if I didn't move, but as soon as I did, she'd remember she was 'wild', dash somewhere I couldn't catch her, eyes wide, body tense, and wait for me to open the door so she could escape.

But the next day she'd be sitting right on the doorstep again... waiting to be let in, trapped, and held.

After I left home, she still would sit on the doorstep and occasionally my parents would take pity on her and let her in. She'd run under the table and hop onto the chair we always sat on together... and happily stay there for hours. Only on that chair though. And even if the door shutting the kitchen from the rest of the house was open, she wouldn't venture further into the house, and she would never let anyone else touch her.

Whenever I'd come home for a visit, she'd fall back into our 'routine' like I'd never left. Unfortunately, she died two years ago. Her name was Sims (like the snowboard brand) and I still miss her.

So, all these ideas coiled together into the mental image of the main character for 'Brake Fluid'.

I think this is why description helps me re-sync with the character, because it links me to his/her world view where physical contact with Triss is such an unsettling, yet important part of their relationship. I wanted that wild/heightened focus to come out in the character, so the descriptions are always extremely lopsided when it comes to touch versus the other senses, though 'sight' also plays a large part.

...so visceral descriptions are really important, not only to the story, but to my writing process. The stronger the image, the stronger the link to the 'voice'.

Realizing exactly what it is that allows me to sync myself with this character was a bit of an epiphany, but as I think back to other writing days, other characters, other stories, I see a very clear pattern.

How about you? Do you you think much about how/why you can sync some days, and other days you get struck with brutal writer's block? Have you figured out your patterns and how to kick-start your writing when you've been stuck?

...I'm sorry if my tendency to overanalyze freaks you out a little ;)


*YES, this got re-written! And it's WAAAAAAAY better. Seriously, you know I'm not afraid of getting laughed at when I post crappy first-draft lines like that...

Genre, and more about comparison

Do you always write in the same genre?

Do you usually read the same genre, or are you the type of person where, as long as there are words, you're going to read them?

One further thought I had on my post from yesterday is how comparison to other writers can also help find your way in what you want to write.

I admit, I'm still on the search to figure out what genre I write it. Sure, the stuff posted/mentioned on this blog all tends to fall into the YA (and one MG) category, but what I used to write was for adults, not teens. But let's lay that aside for the moment.

So far, (in chronological order) I've got:

1) one YA fantasy (the one currently on near-permanent hold) with actual magic/etc

2) something... best described as a YA non-fantasy fantasy (seriously, what the heck IS 'Simon's Oath'??) where it takes place in a fantastical/not-our-world-based city with no magic whatsoever, but it has a historical/dystopian feel

3) a MG magical realism

4) a YA contemporary murder/mystery-ish

5) a full-out YA fairytale (with actual romantic elements!)

I think (and only my long-suffering CP's/writing group could confirm for sure) that all my stories, no matter what they're about, all have a similar flavour, a distinct voice which makes them *mine*, but I really feel like an amateur when someone asks, 'what do you write?', and I can't confidently whip off a single genre.

I don't write dystopian. I don't write mysteries. I don't write contemporary. I don't write fantasy. I don't write fairytales. I don't write romance.

I kind of write a little of everything*.

My reading habits are incredibly eclectic as well. And that might be part of the problem.

Normally, when you find an author you like, and you buy up their new books, it's because that author sticks to a style and type of story that you enjoy, so you expect their next book to be similar.

Sometimes (when I'm feeling negative) I think flailing around in different genres is simply a mark that I can't settle on anything. I've mentioned before that I always want to try new things, that I get bored doing the same thing and always throw myself into things I know nothing about with a kind of masochistic do-or-die attitude.

But other times, I think all this flailing around might be a good thing. If I only read/wrote in the same genre, I'd never get the chance to find out if I'm good at telling other kinds of stories. Or if I'd even like to tell other kinds of stories.

I think it's important to challenge yourself in different areas, not only the ones you feel comfortable in.

After all, you never know if you can succeed unless you try.

If I had stuck with the same thing, I'd still be writing incredibly disturbing short stories where someone almost always dies, and usually not in a pretty way**. So, jumping from that into YA was a huge flailing leap in and of itself.

I told someone recently that whenever I start a new story, it's always something that I think I'm not good at. And it's true. I've even joked about it on this blog before a couple of times.

Reading and writing widely certainly gives you a broader scope for comparison, but the question is, is it better to have a narrower range for more accurate comparison?

In this past year, I've been reading a lot of YA. So far, 68 books on my Kindle and a few paperbacks. This has certainly narrowed my book-purchasing-scope, but I've been doing it on purpose so (hopefully) I can compare an apple with another apple, instead of comparing that apple to an orange or a banana.

In all those books, I found one (that's right, only one) which is even remotely comparable to 'Simon's Oath' (which is still out with a few agents from my initial query batch of ten that I sent out in November). 

And I only read this single, comparable book two weeks ago, so obviously it wasn't mentioned in my query.

...in 68 books, shouldn't it have been more likely to find more than one book that is similar?***

Quirky, hard-to-categorize books are certainly out there... but the odds of an agent taking a chance on one of them is pretty slim.

Which makes me ask myself if I'm looking at the right comparisons or if I'm totally off the mark? Sure, I may say I'm writing YA, but if they're nothing like the YA on the market... then either it's awesome that I've found a gap to fill, or I'm completely delusional.****

So what are your thoughts? 

Is this kind of attitude setting me up for writing-suicide/failure? Or do you see a certain merit in all this flailing around?

At this point, I have no idea :)

* Well, I'm working on it ;) I know there's a ton of genres I haven't even scratched. Though I think it's safe to say I'll skip erotica and super-gory-horror.

**You may have already gotten a hint if you've read the couple pieces of short fiction posted for various blog-fests.

*** Okay, I could probably squeeze out a half-comparison to two others... but still...

**** Anyone want to lay some odds? I'm not sure about the spread, but some days I'm definitely leaning towards 'delusional'

Characteristics of *Character*

On Saturday, I had the pleasure of meeting up with my local writing group for the first time in... months, I think.

...And, amid the sporadic bursts of actual writing and chatting about random things, we touched a bit on why we like to write.

For me, it's always about *character*.

What is it about some characters that feel real, where others feel like cardboard clones?

And I don't have a good answer for that. No one does, I think, 'cause it's subjective. Even if two people like the same story with the same character, I'd be willing to bet money that, even if they connected to the same character, both readers would connect in different ways.

I connect to every character I write. Even if I disagree with their thoughts, emotions, needs, desires, etc... I still connect. I understand them.

Even awful characters like Jackson.

...despite the fact that no one is sad about his death (and rightly so), I still get him. I understand that sense of entitlement that drives his decisions.

The trick now, is honing my writing in such a way that readers understand it... and by that, I don't mean I necessarily want readers to empathize with him, 'cause even I'm glad he's dead. I suppose what I mean is that I want the complexity of his character to be evident. For him to feel *real*.

...and sometimes, it's really fun to read about a truly irredeemable character.

Have you ever heard of/watched a tv show called 'It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia'?

The people who developed the show essentially wanted to explore all the horrible things people joke about doing (or secretly want to do)... and make a tv show about characters doing these things.

Here's a description from wikipedia of the main characters:

They are often dishonest, petty, egotistical, selfish, greedy, unethical, lazy, manipulative, deceitful, hypocritical, self-centered, vain, disloyal, unremorseful, hasty, overly competitive, immature, vengeful, and arrogant. Episodes usually find them hatching elaborate schemes, conspiring against one another and others for personal gain, vengeance, or simply for the entertainment of watching one another's downfall. They inflict physical and psychological pain. They regularly use blackmail to manipulate one another and others outside of the group.

Their unity is not solid; any of them would quickly dump the others for quick profit or personal gain regardless of the consequences. Almost everything they do results in competition among themselves and a considerable amount of the show's dialogue revolves around the characters arguing or yelling over one another. Despite their lack of worldly success, the Gang generally maintain high opinions of themselves and display an often obsessive interest in their own reputations and public images. Despite this high sense of self worth, the Gang often have little sense of shame when attempting to get what they want and will often engage in activities which others would find humiliating, disgusting, or even preposterous, such as smoking crack cocaine in order to qualify for welfare, seducing a priest, or hiding naked inside a leather couch in order to spy on someone.

Yes, this show goes way over the top in believability, but the characters... oh, even though they're all so horrible, you get them. It's like every horrible person you've ever met in real life, all rolled up into 5 main characters. They feel real, you're happy when they get what's coming to them, and you love watching them self-destruct/fail.

Bad things happening to bad people.

Let me clearly state that I have never been tempted to write a 'Mary Sue character', essentially a literary version of myself in which to explore every wish I could ever hope for.

...there's a very good reason for this.

I am not all that interested in myself.

Really, whenever I have read a book where a character is similar to myself... I either get bored or irritated. Usually the latter.

The best part of writing (and reading) is the ability to explore a character who is NOT me. Who likes things I do not, who makes assumptions I would not make, who chooses paths I would most certainly avoid. 

This is probably part of the reason I prefer to write male characters -> because I'm female .

I'm sure this can be considered a form of escapism, but instead of wanting to escape into a fantastical world of amazing things... I just want to escape into someone else's head for a while. And not be me. Even when they are horrible characters.

...which is probably why I'm doing this whole writing thing in the first place...

And if I want to escape, it's got to be believable, which is why it all comes back to characters.

Whenever I encounter a character that feels like a cardboard clone, I wonder how real that character was to the author. Did they have a visual image? Could they hear the tone of the voice clearly? See the body language/mannerisms/ticks? Was the failure to connect just a disconnect between me (the reader), or was it a failure of the author in their ability to transmit essential character-building-information?

Do you think about why you connect with certain characters over others? Do you find they are similar to yourself, or not? What about the ones you write compared to the ones you connect to when you read? How clearly can you imagine the characters you connect with versus the ones that feel like cardboard?

Expanding taste in books

Perhaps due to the kind of books I grew up with, I never had much taste for sci-fi and fantasy.

When I was quite young (like 7-9), I did read books that could be classified under those genres. 'The Dark is Rising' series by Susan Cooper, 'The Hobbit', '20,000 Leagues Under the Sea', 'Frankenstein', 'Dracula', some short story collections by Poe and Kafka. I also liked 'Dr. Doolittle', 'Treasure Island', started into the Agatha Christie when I was around 10, then ate through all the Christopher Pike books available in the then-tiny Young Adult section of the bookstore.

But for some reason when I hit my teenage years, I got sucked into contemporary. Perhaps, in that stage of growing up, I was seeking something 'real' and felt it was necessary to throw off the silly fantasies of childhood. I was still pretty childish though. A 'late bloomer' if you will, so I never latched onto anything with romance as the main plot. Agatha Christie, Poe & Kafka had left me with a taste for murder and darkness, so I read Clive Barker and some of John Saul's books. I discovered Jostein Gaarder, Haruki Murakami, Banana Yoshimoto and a whole stream of authors who only ever wrote one or two books before fading away into obscurity... but each of them often had just a hint of something strange, something not quite 'real'.

I'd have to say that I didn't read anything that was strictly 'fantasy' until a couple years ago (I know, I was way behind in the game...) when I eventually (and somewhat begrudgingly) picked up the first couple Harry Potter books. They didn't suit my taste, so I didn't get beyond the third one (I think). I figured, since the books were so widely popular, that I have given the genre a fair chance, and went back to reading contemporary and non-fiction.

In this last year, I've made a decision to spread my reading-net. Since I'm pretty ignorant about other genres, I've been asking other people for the names of authors and books that they like.

Some have been absolute misses, where I can barely force myself to get through the pages (I always finish what I start), but there have been some surprising hits as well!

I just finished reading a sci-fi book by Mike Resnick called 'The Dark Lady' and absolutely loved it. Without someone recommending it to me (thanks, L!) I never would have picked up the 'Hunger Games' books. I read a classic YA fantastical trilogy by Garth Nix (Sabriel, etc), a sci-fi YA trilogy by Patrick Ness (The Knife of Never Letting Go, etc), and even a few books with reasonably prevalent romantic-subplots. A few were enjoyable, despite the grindingly obvious conclusions, one was disappointing as I had been quite excited about the author's reputation and the premise (which was nice and dark).

I'm still leery of the whole paranormal/romance genre, but I think I'm going to dabble a little more in the sci-fi genre and perhaps try a historical fiction or two. I know Laurie Halse Anderson has one about the yellow fever epidemic... so I might start there.

Any recommendations?

...I may even try a paranormal-type book if there's a good one without the standard love-triangle plot.

Rambling impulse

source here

As a pantser, I never pass up breakfast. Or a chance to run a zig-zagging-tangent-rich-path through a new story.

It doesn't always turn out great, sometimes things go horribly wrong (or worse, boring), but tapping into that crazy part of my brain that wants to tear around like a hyperactive three-year-old and make a giant mess... well, that's when things start getting interesting.

'Cause here's the thing... to an adult, a multi-coloured scribble, a squished pancake of coloured Play-Doh or a clump of randomly stuck together Lego, well, they're kinda baffling. Especially if you are expected to guess what those are supposed to be.

To a child, it's obvious. And they have conviction that their representational creations are authentic. They're ready and willing to tell you you're wrong if you guess 'porcupine' after squinting at the vaguely octagonal brown smudge with purple lines sticking out every which way.

No, it's a giraffe. Or a space station.

It doesn't matter how inaccurate the execution, the vision behind it is clear.

Sure, it might look like a mess, but it's something.

And y'know, maybe that's all anyone else will see... an ugly, confusing mess on a page.

...but wouldn't it be the best feeling in the world to have someone look at that page and ask, "Is this a giraffe?"

...and you can say, "Yes!"

...because they get it.

Now, this will probably sound odd considering my last post was a self-reflection about personal taste, but I find my best ideas come from the most random and strange places. Usually they don't make sense. I squint at them on the page and all I can see are vaguely octagonal brown smudges with random purple lines... but somehow, later it makes sense. I can pick out a shape or a few lines that feel right, that look accurate, that imperfectly capture something that I didn't even know I was trying to say.

And I wouldn't have said it, if I tried to say it. When you're sketching, often the best lines are the ones you didn't mean to draw. They happen almost by accident when you're free and loose and having fun. The moment you start trying to put down a perfect line, your muscles lock down and you lose that flow of motion and your drawing comes out stilted, forced.

So never pass up the chance to make a mess, to be impulsive, to scribble all over the page and have fun with it.

I think... it's okay to give yourself permission to play around, to stretch your creative muscles, and not just with writing. The more experiences you have in life, the bigger the inner-resevoir you will have which you can tap into when you need it.

If you do the same things every day, you're only going to have a single, knotted rope of knowledge to climb on. Sure, it's easy to climb straight up to the ceiling on a rope like that, it's just one-hand-over-the-other, but wouldn't it be more fun to climb in every direction? The more varied the activities and experiences, the more ropes get added, and soon you can pull from a web of interconnecting knowledge instead of just the single knotted rope.

While I see the benefits of specialty knowledge, I think being a more rounded individual is healthier and more enjoyable, and part of new/different experiences is the way you do them.

Have conviction in what you do. But that doesn't mean you have to be serious about it.

Bowling competitively is a completely different experience than bowling blind-folded or backwards with a group of friends.

So make a mess, goof off, have fun, try something new.


...and speaking of ropes and messes, wow, that certainly was a rambling post, wasn't it?

Irredeemable characters

Since I was sick last week, I ended up re-watching 'Firefly' to stave off the crippling effects of boredom.

A few weeks ago, I re-watched both seasons of 'Dead Like Me'.

I'd have to say, I have quite the thing for irredeemable characters. Ones who know they could change but choose not to. Where you have to bribe (or threaten) to get them to do the right thing. Characters like this often have shallow relationships with the people around them, plenty of bravado, and usually a healthy (or overblown) dose of self-esteem.

And, like Cap'n Jack Sparrow from 'Pirates of the Caribbean', truly, it's better when they don't redeem themselves in the end.

Let's start with 'Firefly', since I'm assuming that show is better known than 'Dead Like Me'.*

Can you guess my favourite characters?

No contest. I love Jayne and Badger.

Jayne's a hired gun on the Serenity crew with (slightly) more brains than morals and Badger's a small-time criminal boss/middleman on Persephone. And I nearly kill myself laughing every time one of them shows up. The dialogue for these two is just so perfect. Especially how Badger mis-uses words. I totally wish he had more screen time in the series. I think he's only in two or three episodes, but Jayne... oh, Jayne. He's awesome. My favourite part about this character is that he's clear about the fact he'd betray anyone of the crew... if the price was right.

The first time I watched this series, honestly, I couldn't care less about Mal, Inara, River & Simon, or the other characters. I was only watching 'Firefly' for the moment Jayne finally betrayed the rest of the crew.

What's that famous line about writing... the whole, if there's a gun in scene 1, it better go off by the end of scene 3... or something like that?

And Jayne didn't disappoint. It's my favourite episode out of the series.

For the character Mason, from 'Dead Like Me', the actor who played him said (in an interview/extra in the season 2 dvds) that he worked with the writers because he didn't want Mason to ever evolve. Mason is a British grim reaper who died during the '60's by drilling a hole in his head (with a power drill) to try to attain a permanent high. I'm happy to say that... at the end of the second season, he hadn't evolved since his death. One of my favourite episodes is when he steals the tips from Kiffany (the waitress at the restaurant they regularly meet at) and she bans him from coming in. Even though he is eventually forgiven, it's clear that he didn't really learn anything.

Have you ever written a morally bankrupt character? Was it difficult, or did you love the freedom of it? I'm going to assume there's a hefty portion of people out there who have seen the 'Firefly' series... what do you think of Jayne? Who's your favourite character from the show, and why? Did you also find that character to be the most interesting?

...and if any of you have seen 'Dead Like Me', I'd love to hear your thoughts on Mason :)



*Incidentally, some of the actors in these two shows have ties to each other and to another favourite tv show of mine, Wonderfalls.

The character of Inara, from 'Firefly', was originally supposed to be played by Rebecca Gayheart, who was the grim reaper Betty, in 'Dead Like Me'

Jewel Staite (a Canadian actor who grew up... about 20 minutes from where I grew up), who plays Kaylee on 'Firefly', also played Heidi Gotts (the cheating wife of the love interest, Eric) on 'Wonderfalls'. She was also in one episode of 'Dead Like Me', second season, as a goth girl who hooks up with Mason in a music store.