Character Growth: The Point of the Story

 Is it necessary for a protagonist to continually gain power/ability/expertise as a series progresses?

For my book it's imperative the protagonist, at a bare minimum, grows emotionally. They can grow, break, and rebuild over the course of the series. The "break and rebuild" is useful if a series that was intended to be seven books suddenly becomes wildly popular with enough demand to justify continuing the series (hey, I'm allowed to dream, right?). However, if there's no character development internally and/or externally, then the series is Same Shit, Different Monster. That's no fun for me to write. If it's no fun for me to write, then it's no fun for anyone to read. 

Regular visitors to this blog know I'm a planner. I plan the series arc and how many books will be in the series before I begin Book One. By having a predetermined end of the series, I avoid giving my protagonist too much power too quickly, thus robbing her of risks and challenges, which deny her character growth and make the story dull. 

It is absolutely possible to over-develop a protagonist and have them grow too much too fast. Average Joan leveling up to an omnipotent undefeatable world-creator overnight is a trap that happens often in series that aren't pre-planned. The character has no space to grow. They have no believable opposition. They have all the gizmos, all the magics, all the knowledge...and the character fizzles. They're no longer compelling. Readers become bored and abandon the series. 

Yes, there are series with 25+ books holding firmly in the Best Seller lists that have zero character growth. The books are as formulaic as the characters. Obviously, those stories aren't character-driven. Obviously, the audience for those books enjoys the comfort of predictability. Obviously, I'm not dunking on a dedicated fanbase for liking a style that's not mine. It's one of many reasons why there are few hard and fast rules in writing. Most everything is recommendations based on "what works for me. YMMV."

For me, my protags have to evolve over the course of a book and a series. Otherwise, what's the point of the story?

Politics and the Protagonist

 How does politics (of the fictional world) flavor the outcome of our stories?

I'm like Jeffe in that politics is a BFD in my fictional worlds. Be it UF or HF, the underlying theme across all my stories is about changing society and social structures. After all, what is politics but the manipulation of social contracts by individuals and/or organizations? Part of the fun of worldbuilding is defining the current political landscape, then spending the next three hundred-ish pages trying to uphold or rebel against it. The protagonist's relationship to society, and, by extension, authority, is a foundational character definition. The plot unfolds from that relationship. 

I do tend to write protagonists who are in a position to affect large-scale change. Macro movers who are plagued by consequences on a micro level. The contrast keeps the character relatable while reinforcing how decisions made by the top of the food chain come to bear on individuals. That's not to say every protag has to be part of the 0.0001% of the world's elite in order to influence politics. To the contrary. The most classic hero archetype is the nobody who becomes the king/god. 

My schtick is that I like to show the repercussions of forced change. The ugly consequences of shattering social contracts. The unrest stemming from ambiguity. The insecurity of crumbling of boundaries. The conflicts of redefining social expectations. That's the reason I write series instead of standalones. I'm fascinated by what happens after the hero achieves the initial win. Not just how the hero changes, but how society changes for better and worse. How are the new rules decided, and who cements them? How does the political landscape shift and can it ever be stabilized?

In-world politics, even when subtly displayed, is the spinal disk amid the backbone of my stories. 

Writing the Opening Sentence: Choose Your Hook

The Seven Hooks of openings for a book. I gotta admit, I had to look them up because I've never thought about categorizing the first sentence of my story. The first chapter is always the hardest for me--first one written and last one completed--so I attack the hook from a "put words on page, fix later" method. When I was a baby writer swimming around in various writers' groups, many members were obsessed with nailing the "perfect" opening line, usually at the cost of writing the rest of the book.  That's...that's not good. 

Write the book.

Write. The. Book. 

That's not to diminish the importance of a good hook. It's an encouragement to keep writing your story even if your hook is crappy. A compelling first sentence might not come to you until you're in the editing process. It's okay if it doesn't come to you at all as long as the rest of the paragraph/page pulls in the reader. Whatever you do, don't get derailed by the hook. Keep going.

For what it's worth, here's a list of hooks from my high fantasy and urban fantasy books and their associated category:

Larcout: Blood beings could be chattel or they could be char. [Hook = Why]

The Burned Spy: The antidote burned worse than the toxin. [Hook = Why]

The Plagued Spy: "Sneak, sneak, sneak, creepy guy. I see you," Bix sang to herself. [Hook = character]

The Captured Spy: The prickling of the skin. The brittle air raking across the nape. The weight of regard pressing against the body. Old spies knew to pay attention to these sensations. [Hook = character]

The Hanged Spy: Shadowy dancers twirled on a continuous loop over crystalline walls courtesy of a self-winding music box. [Hook = Setting]

The Exposed Spy: The stench of scorched plastic permeated the two-bedroom apartment on the second floor of a town house in Southeast Washington, DC, Primary Mid World. [Hook = Setting + Why]

The Shackled Spy: Snow flurries flirted with tourists bundled up against the biting winds rolling off the Potomac River. [Hook = Setting]

The Heralded Spy: War raged throughout the Mid Worlds. [Hook = Catastrophe Why]

As you can see, I use different types of hooks depending on the story. Some are more intriguing than others, but they each set up the story in a different way. Missing from my usage list are: The Goal hook, The Conflicting Emotions hook, and The Inherent Problem hook. Now that I know there are categories, maybe I'll make an effort to incorporate the unused ones in future books. Maybe. Got to write those stories first. 

Do Characters HAVE To Die?

This week we're asking ourselves if we have to kill characters for there to be sufficient risk to maintain reader interest. What other threats work better or just as effectively?

Here's my unpopular opinion: 

Death does not present sufficient stakes. 

Not anymore. Culturally, at least in the US, we're increasingly inured to it. It's everywhere in our entertainment. It's every night on the news. It's every morning in our feeds. It's exploited by industries and charities to reach deeper into our pockets. It's a revenue stream in the business of healthcare. Six degrees of separation connects most of us to it at any given time. It's shoved in our faces so often that unless it befalls someone in our immediate presence or our core/chosen family, our reactions are muted or performative. Nowhere is our DNGAF about death more apparent than in our national and individual response to the current pandemic. Over 33 million Americans infected with a virus proven to lead to a gruesome death, and our mental disconnect from mortality allowed prevention to become a culture war. American exceptionalism at its worst. We believe dying will happen to "everybody except me," even though, logically, we know our time on this world is finite. Logically, we know we don't get to choose how we go out. Still, we hide behind our illusion of safety and delusion of "it won't happen to me."

Thus, I think as authors we ought to strive for different stakes if we're going to really connect to the reader. If we want to reach beyond the sameness of "welp, that character was fun while they lasted," then we have to elevate our world-building so that death isn't the most feared consequence of our characters' actions or inactions. Loss of liberty, loss of home, loss of status, loss of mental capacity, loss of physical ability, there are so many things a character can fear more than dying. A loss of love not through death but due to being driven away by one's own actions is far more heartbreaking. As long as there is a clear line of ownership of the consequences, a direct cause/effect of the choices the character made, then I think--I hope--the stakes are more vital to the character and more captivating to the reader.

Holding strong in the storm

 I hope the fact that I no longer live on a boat doesn't preclude nautical metaphors. Because here we are again. 

We all know the wind is going to blow in our lives. Most of us have learned to handle that wind and, in fact, use it to propel us. 

But those aren't the winds we're talking about this week. This week is about the storms, squalls, and cyclones. The chill and stinging rain and howling winds yanking and tugging and churning up the water of our routines and lives.

With Covid, we all know what that looks like now. Stress. Uncertainty. A little fear. In some cases, panic and desolation. 

When a storm sweeps in, the ideal place to be is moored to a solid mass. A dock. In a writer's case, that solid mass is a habit set deep in the bedrock of your days. A habit like Jeffe's. Tying up to that is safe. Reliable. Immovable. Sometimes you get a few hard bounces against the dock, but so long as your lines hold, your craft is safe.

The problem is that sometimes you're underway when storms spin up. No docks in sight. You're caught out in dangerous conditions. On a boat (and in matters of health and well-being), your single job is to keep your nose into the wind. Why? To keep from being capsized. If you can find shelter, you run for it. And then you set an anchor and give yourself a really, really long leash. That's what keeps your anchor hooked into the bottom of the seabed and your craft in a position to ride out the worst. 

Translated out of nautical metaphor: Tie up to the safety of established habit when you can, but when the horse feathers hit the fan and you can't fall back on habit, throw out an anchor. Let that anchor take the form of a craft class or anything that requires you to get your head in your writing for a few hours each week. 

Then give yourself grace. A lot of it. 

Remember. Your first job is protecting your health and well-being when storms roar in to knock you off course. When you're healthy, you have a million wishes. When you aren't healthy, you have only one wish. 

Don't let the storms steal your wishes.

No conflict, No story

 No conflict, no story.

Which translates to: no antagonist = no conflict = no story. And that’s what we’re talking about this week, the antagonist’s arc! 

My daughter DNFd (did not finish) a book last night. It had been a book she’d excitedly picked up having been sold on the back blurb. When I asked her why the DNF she said ‘because nothing’s happening’. 

As authors, we want to avoid that kiss of death at all costs. So, how do we do it? I don’t know about you, but I can share my process! 

Interestingly, to me anyway, I realized I go about crafting my antagonists two different ways depending on the genre. 

Fantasy

When I write fantasy I start out with my hero and I see them at the climax of the story, the moment they are most fearful and also the moment they rip through whatever’s been holding them back. Now, I don’t always see what exactly they’re up against, but I observe the character’s emotions and what’s going on around them. 

Since I have a pretty good sense of who the hero is and what's at stake for them I know that the villain has to either want the same thing, with their own twist of course, or want an antithesis to the hero's desires. With all that information I can put together the big evil that must be stopped and then figure out how my hero got to that climax point.

Science Fiction

When I write sci-fi I start out with the antagonist, the big evil that must be stopped. Once I know who, or what, my villain is I can craft the type of hero the world needs to stop it. Whoa, that kinda sounds like superhero stuff. But in a way, sci-fi—the kind that threatens the entire world—needs someone larger than life. And I love making taking a person who sees themselves as only successful in their small corner of the world and challenging them so they grow into a superhero. 

It doesn’t matter what genre, we want strong antagonists. And here’s one tip I’ve picked up over the years:

Keep it Simple. 

Your villain doesn’t need a master plan that requires blueprints and a powerpoint. You only need a conflict that smacks your hero in the face. 

When I started writing The Mars Strain it was during the 2015 Ebola outbreak. I was running a laboratory and participating on a multi-healthcare system Emergency Preparedness Board. Every day I was thinking ahead to what we’d need and what we’d do if there was a deadly outbreak that reached across the world to us. From that real life experience I imagined a new organism, and because I write to entertain, not mimic real life, my organism came from Mars. Boom. There was my antagonist with its one goal: proliferate.

How do you create the perfect antagonist? 

Maybe your hero and villain are the same, only one choice veered the antagonist off to another path. Maybe your antagonist has very little page time but you Al Pacino the Devil’s Advocate and nearly convince your hero to make the wrong climatic choice. I’d love to know! 

ISNTFJ: Myers-Briggs & My Writing

Myers-Briggs Personality Typing System (MBPTS) personalities in relation to writing. Of the four primary cognitive functions, which one are you and how does it affect your writing? Intuition, Sensing, Thinking, and Feeling.

Here's the thing about my Myers-Briggs test results, and I doubt I'm alone in this: they're different each time I take the test. The only category I'm consistent in scoring is Introverted (rather than Extroverted). When I've taken the test as a corporate wonk, I've scored as an INTJ. When I've taken the test as a creative, ISFP. Those procrastination-enhancing online quizzes when I ought to be writing instead? Taken five minutes apart? Random combos. Really, it's all about what skills are needed in the circumstance. So, how does that affect my writing? 

Introverted vs Extroverted: Simply put, being around people zaps my energy. Unlike an extrovert who is energized by being around people, being in public is a performance for me. It requires me to maintain a heightened level of outward awareness and atypical (for me) behaviors, which exacerbates my overstimulated flight response that is caused by my general anxiety. I am always looking for the exit. Whether I am running for said exit depends on how quickly I can complete the task that's demanded my public appearance. Completing the task dictates the rest of my MBPTS score. 

When it comes to character dev, writing extroverts as the protag is a fun exercise and a good reminder of why I don't do it IRL. Yes, I, sitting alone in my recliner, can feel exhausted on behalf of my character enthusiastically peopling with people. It's a classic case of, "What would I, KAK, do? The character should do the opposite of that."

Sensing vs iNtution: The "how do we gather information" category. Reality versus Imagination. Concrete vs Abstract. Hands-on Experience vs Contemplating Patterns. Scoring on this is mostly about whether I'm collaborating or working independently and what the project goal is. I learn best by doing, no doubt about it. But I am a product of public school indoctrination and higher education in the humanities, so decerning patterns and extrapolating on others' experiences is something at which I'm adept as well. 

How this plays out in my books is reflected in the story's plot. How do my characters go about gathering the information they need to progress to the next step in the journey? Protags tend to be Sensing because showing the character's experience and methods of discovery is important to character-driven plots. AKA action chapters = Sensing. Reality is happening. Introspection scenes are important to reiterate the protag connecting the dots of the plot's progression, plus the downbeat is just as necessary to pacing as the high-intensity action scenes. However, too much navel-gazing drags down the story. For my books, Intuition-driven characters usually are those who fill the mentor role in the larger cast.

Thinking vs Feeling: How I make decisions, facts vs gut reaction. In this category, I'm usually within 4 points of the other. About as close to "equal" as the test gets. Really, it comes down to the goal and what consequences of the decision will be. What is the margin for risk? Big stakes? I'm all about facts and experience. If the cost of a screw-up is going to notably impact the well-being of myself or others, then gimme facts. Unknown territory, unreliable sources, or conflicting "facts"? Medium-low impact? Ability to correct if the wrong decision is made? Sure, I'm all about the luxury of decision-making based on the feels. 

However, as an Army Brat, MAKE A COMMAND DECISION is deeply ingrained. Dear Readers, there is nothing that will send me around the bend faster than someone who won't make a decision when they are the ones with the responsibility to do so. I will either steamroll over the indecisive person or I will walk away. Pee or get off the godsdamned pot. Nope, not even remotely sorry. Need time to make a decision? Fine. Say so and stick to it. I'll respect your position as the decision-maker if you respect my time. 

When it comes to writing, this category is where the analytical side of being an author meets the creative side. Determining how I market my books and evaluate ROI, that's all Thinking. Deciding when my characters are decision-makers versus decision-receivers is heavy on Feeling.  

Judging vs Perceiving: When engaging with the outside world (aka society), do I prefer structure and organization (Judging), or am I most comfortable in fluid spontaneous situations (Perceiving)? Now, I'm not the greatest fan of the term "Judging" here because it implies "Judgemental." Contrasting that with "Perceiving" implies Judging is narrow-minded, blind to the outliers, and will side with authority over morality. Meanwhile, "perceiving" implies wide-eyed wonder and naivety. Words matter, and in the case of MBPTS, the naming convention is an epic fail. 

That said, I'm predominantly Judging because I prefer to know the expectation, the process, and the measure of success so I can complete the task and retreat into my hermitage. I am a creature of habit. I like having a plan. cough Spontaneity is fine, as long as it's scheduled. cough It goes back to managing my anxiety, if I know what to expect and what is expected of me, then I'm much more likely to not only be successful, but I also will avoid a full-blown panic attack. 

How Judging versus Perceiving shows up in my writing is that I am a skeletal plotter. I define the structure and organize the major events before I start the book. My penchant for perceiving is reflected in all that isn't defined in the outline. I do like surprises. I do like discovery. I do like an unexpected twist. To me, that's good entertainment. In fiction. Fiction. 

Do not, under any circumstance, show up at my home unexpectedly. That shit's not funny. 

Story Prep: How Word Count Determines The Work

Differences in writing a short story, a novella, a novel, and a series: Do I prepare for length before writing or do I fatten/trim after drafting?

I absolutely have to know the target length before I begin to consider the first nugget of the story, the characters, the settings, or any part at all. For me, length determines the type of story I'm going to tell. The shorter the work, the shorter the time span covered in the story, the faster you have to get to your point, the simpler your point must be.

As Jeffe mentioned on Sunday, shorter works like a short story (~5k-10k words) don't leave room for Scooby-Gangs and elaborate world-building. The protagonist has mere minutes to maybe an hour to accomplish their goal. It's 15 min of a TV episode. Half of a pilot ep. Masters of this format can provoke emotional connections with minimal words and concise actions.

Novellas (~15k-40k words), maybe cover a day or a long weekend. Protag gets a wingman, world-building is richer but contained and limited. Plot is a straight line, no subplots (unless it's part of a series).  Think of a novella as a full TV episode. Maybe two eps if you're aiming for 40k. I don't tend to write novellas because I like to spend time in the worlds I'm creating while molding my characters. That's not a knock on the authors who do write them. There are many great novellas out there. Check out the 2021 HUGO nominated novellas (and novels) here. 

Novels, their optimal length is highly dependent on the genre. While there are always exceptions, the readers of the genre have certain expectations. Traditional publishers have established and posted word-count limits that reinforce those reader expectations. Writers guilds and associations are much more generous in what lengths they consider novels. However, there is nothing that infuriates a reader more than paying full market price for a novel in a genre where the average length is ~90k and the book they've purchased is half that long yet marketed as a novel. Something to keep in mind when deciding if your story should be a novel or novella.

That said, novels are my thing. The time span covered in a single novel can be as short as a day or longer than a decade. Single protagonist or multiple. A small cast of characters or cast of thousands. The world-building had better be rich if you're writing SFF. While there is a primary plot driving the story, the subplots abound. Yes, I plot (see previous posts for the bad things that happen when I don't). Yes, I absolutely know if the novel is a standalone or part of a series. I  prefer writing series, and I do determine how long that series will be before I write Book 1. (Four books in the Fire Born High Fantasy series. Seven in the Immortal Spy Urban Fantasy series. Unnamed trilogy currently in concept.)

So, the short answer to the week's question is: Yes, I identify the target length of the work so I know the constraints before I begin plotting the story.

The Religion of Character Development

Does religion change/determine the course of a story?

Uh, for the characters? Sure. Assuming religion is defined as devotion to a fixed set of beliefs, then all my stories deal with religion. It could be argued that character development is the discovery, testing, and confirmation or change in said beliefs. Whether there are greater entities involved in those belief systems and whether there are formalized mass followings varies. 

In my Fire Born series, there are five gods who are actively and visibly involved in the lives of their creations. How those gods are worshipped forms the structures of the five different societies. Naturally, the protagonist comes along to shake those beliefs to their core, sometimes shattering them and sometimes reshaping them as her own beliefs and values are tested and changed.

In my Immortal Spy series, gods, fates, angels, and dragons are the ruling class. Jokes abound about pillars of real-world mass religions. 

Now, if you're wondering if my personal beliefs prevent or permit me to write characters, plots, and settings in certain ways, I would say they permit me and never prevent me. As an author, if you can't or won't examine systems of belief through the eye of fiction, then you might need to rethink what kind of stories you're telling. Are your characters being challenged? Are they on a journey? Stuff's bound to happen that makes them question who they are, how they're doing things, why they're doing them--regardless of whether the protag realizes or admits it--it should be obvious to the reader. That's character development. That is the religion of storytelling.

Braaaains! Erm, Brainstorming

What is my brainstorming process? Do I solicit opinions? Do I drag trusted coconspirators through the twists and webs of my weird? 

Mostly, no. 

I will bounce the idea of which project(s) to pursue off a friend or two, but when it comes to the stories themselves, that's not a group-think thing. It's not because I think I'm some sort of fantasy genius; it's more that my author-voice is rooted in how I conceive and farm the story. I need to be able to roll around and bury myself in my imaginary dirt without permission or supervision, or feeling like I'm intruding on someone else's turf. Even though I'm a skeletal plotter, I return often to the landfill of my imagination for the details of the story. 

For me, story ideas usually start with a protagonist, two or three supporting characters, a couple of climactic moments, and an emotional challenge. From there it's figuring out magic systems, the presence of creatures, and the environment. Then comes the tricky bit, the plot. 

Now, I do love to participate in brainstorming other people's ideas or just brainstorming with friends for shits and giggles. Makes me a fine hypocrite, I suppose, but what's not to love about a lengthy game of What If? It's a great way to learn more about my friends. And, who knows, I might even track a little dirt home.  

On My Mind: Protagonist Age

On my mind this week are thoughts about determining the appropriate age for the protagonist(s) of a new high fantasy trilogy that's up next in the writing queue after I finish Bix Book 7. It stems from frequent forum discussions about why there are so few women age 40+ starring as protagonists. It's not to say that there aren't any books that slot that need; it's that women of a certain age remain atypical protagonists.  

Is it an issue of the ease of fallibility? The younger they are, the more we forgive stupid decisions. Stupid decisions allow for characters to end up in high-stakes situations far more often and easily than mature characters who know better. After all, brains aren't fully developed until the mid20s.

Is it an issue of fewer responsibilities? Quests are a lot easier when the only responsibility you have is to yourself. As you age, you amass things, people, relationships, and obligations. Responding to an inciting moment for a 40+ carries greater weight than a barely 20 something, yet it's easier? more palatable? more acceptable? for a young adult to cut ties to 'find themselves' or to shirk responsibilities because they can't prioritize?

Is it an issue of implied permission for selfishness? Youth is inherently selfish. The world of a teen/young adult revolves around the individual. Even if they're obsessed with a romantic interest, it is only because they believe that interest will somehow "save" them from whatever ills. If a 50-year-old pulled the same self-centered stunts, they'd be shamed, ridiculed, derided. They wouldn't be heroic, they'd be assholes.

Is it an issue of youthful romance being hot and passionate, where midlife love is dull, tame, boring? Let's face it, as a society, we're conditioned to believe that bedding the hot, young (above the age of consent) thing is a laudable goal regardless of the age difference. But what if a 60-year-old protagonist doesn't want the plaything? Training wheels are tiresome. The drama of youth is tedious. What they want is someone established and content with who they are. They want the butterflies of new love without the angst youthful insecurities. Too blah? No meaty story there?

Is it an issue of a happy stable relationship being a character flaw?  Whatever shall a writer do about romantic tension if their protagonist is in a long-term loving relationship? Default to justifying a cheating scandal? Less heroic, unless they're the one being cheated on, in which case being the victim is trite and overdone. Kill off the loved one as motivation? Again, cliche. It requires more creative effort to show that love can be constant and still have challenges that don't mock or threaten fidelity. 

Is it an issue of the ease of inexperience? Imagine, if you will, a youthful protagonist who wasn't an instant expert. Who wasn't in a position of authority because they hadn't earned it yet. Because, gasp, the old folks with tons of hands-on experience were in charge and not inherently evil? Imagine the protagonist in a position of leadership has to quell another uprising of privileged, entitled youths who can't conceive of the world beyond their limited experience. Is that as interesting as the story of rebellion told through the eyes of the youth?

Is it an issue of mass appeal? Since every adult has been young and precocious in their own way, does it make a story more relatable to the masses if the protag is also young? Does having an older protagonist limit reader enjoyment because of conscious or unconscious ageism? Is "she's too old to do that" a fault of reader perception or author creativity? 

Obviously, I don't have answers. I'm still working through the tradeoffs of an older versus a younger protagonist. Opinions? Considerations? Tell me about them in the Comments!

Knitting Scenes into Stories: Nah, I'm Way Too Rigid

Knitting in writing. Do I? Have I? Should I?

~slaps knee~

Oh, dear Readers, I have attempted the great "write scenes as they come to you, then knit them together into a cohesive story."

Such. A. Disastrophy.

My analytical brain had apoplexy. It shrieked. It flailed. It gave me a two-week migraine to ensure I never, ever, ever pulled a stunt like that again. The time it took to write that story was years longer than it should've been. The isolated scenes I'd written never made it into the final story. Worst of all, the plot and pacing of the book never recovered from trying to incorporate those pre-written islands. That is a 300k under-the-bed book that will never see the light of day.

The pole up my butt is way too stiff to let me do patchwork story writing. I am too much a girl of process and flow. A, then B, then C. My clunkiest stories are ones I didn't plot. Trying to warp a plot around pre-written scenes is 10x worse for me and the reader because it's obvious I'm trying too hard to make Fetch happen. You might think having a plot then writing the isolated scenes would make them easier to incorporate. Dear Reader, you'd be wrong. 

My method of writing requires Ch 2 to build off Ch1 and to set up Ch 3. Ch3 builds off Ch 2 and sets up Ch 4. Rando chapter out there, holding up a boombox playing "Don't You Want Me, Baby" will never fit. It'd be like a tangle of dog hair laundered into your sweater. It's not the right texture or color. It's got strands that waggle beyond the warp and weft; it's a total distraction....that gets removed.

What about developmental edits that ask me to move pieces around?

~scratches blossoming rash~

That--that's a rewrite of the whole fucking book. Knit one, purl two. If you purl one, knit two in the middle of the back piece you've got to undo everything that came after and re-knit. Or you live with the glaring flaw. Thems your options. 

Admittedly, there are many successful authors who can and do beautifully knit scenes into great stories. I'm not saying you shouldn't; I'm saying I can't. So, do I knit? Not literally. Not figuratively. 

Die, Trope, Die, Damnit!

Tropes that just won't die, eh? Tropes that need to be shoved through the airlock during an interstellar mission? Tropes that ought to be dunked in lighter fluid then fed to a dragon?

The whole Incest is Best thing. Like, really? REALLY? Even the allusion to it needs to be dropped into an active volcano. Sexual abuse is horrible on any scale, regardless of gender. Rape as character motivation or punishment is so ingrained in spec-fic that it's more shocking to not encounter it. Stories that add Keeping It In The Family as an extra layer of brokenness? Ugh. DNF. Instant wall-banger.

Yeah, yeah, "but it happens" and "history is full of examples." So? Fantasy in the 80s was rife with sibling sex. Hell, there was required reading in school involving that shit. Fast-forward 40 years and low and behold, that damn trope is back. Worming its way into popular SFF, again. More than just that one super famous series that made it to TV or even that other semi-popular book-to-show series. More than that next one you're thinking of too.

~head explodes~

If you want your character(s) to be really fucked up, you don't have to have them fuck their family. FFS.

~wanders off to find brain bleach~

Beware the Ides and Plagues of March: Favorite (Written) Murder

As days in quarantine stretch without a light of reprieve, those who enjoy being left the hell alone now find themselves trapped with other beings who require attention and maintenance. They may find their thoughts turning to murder...

...Fictitious murder, folks. We're all about the fantasy here.

Not gonna lie, people and non-people die in my books (but never the dog!). Usually amid spatter and gore. Depending on the series, death is by blade, brute strength, or magic. Parasites that extract salt from a body while injecting venom that boils the blood. A portal that tears open a heart. Angel fire or electrocution. Eviction of a soul. How 'bout an old fashioned neck snap. The bodies do pile up in my stories.

The murder that still makes me snicker (because I'm an evil author, natch) is from my debut novel LARCOUT where our fire-warrior protag is being introduced to a new culture that assumes women are feeble:

Vadrigyn pivoted. Her fist connected squarely with the nose of the closest fool…and punched through the back of his skull. Blood and brain oozed down her wrist and stained her vambrace. The body reduced to sand, leaving her with a skull bracelet.

Fragile blood-beings.

Soft blows, barely more than a swat at the air, would suffice to incapacitate a blood-being. She knew that. Gentle. She must be gentle in combat.

How absurd.

In this time of social distancing, please, Wash Your Damn Hands and Stay Home when possible. You don't know who around you is a carrier or immunocompromised. Dying from the plague is a shitastic way to go.

🍀 Lá Fhéile Pádraig sona duit! 🍀 

Feedback: When is it DNGAF vs Useful

How do I know who to trust with my work, at which stages, and how much weight do I give their input?

~rubs neck~

This is sort of a work-backward topic for me. First question is: do I have a legal obligation to someone? E.g, a publishing contract. If yes, then they get to have input in concept, completed draft, and final edits. There's a legal document that says who gets to have a say, in what, and what the consequence are for ignoring them. Easy answers there.

If I don't have a contract, but I have an agent, I am likely to seek their input on "what's next." Eg. I'm tossing around three concepts, which is the one they feel most able to sell?  To me, an agent is there to help me plan my career short and long term as well as sell my manuscript(s) to publishers. Some people have agents who also provide editorial feedback in addition to career planning and mss sales. If edits are part of the established relationship, then value your agent's opinion or get a different agent.

If I have neither a contract nor an agent and all decisions are mine, then I default to my gut. I'm not a sharer of concepts or incomplete works. I'm the Critique Partner who will hand over a completed draft before I solicit feedback. In reverse, I'm the Critique Partner who is most effective when I have your completed draft. My editorial strengths are in the development of plot and character. If I don't know where your character is headed, I can't really tell you if an explosive action response is the best next step. I have had potential CPs who worked best exchanging chapters so they were receiving near-constant feedback. I wasn't the right fit for them. I didn't like them any less as people, we simply weren't compatible as CPs.

Beyond the CP stage, I trust the professional editors I've paid. I've had one crappy dev editor, and the rest have been amazing. I've learned that I need to tell my editors if I have specific questions or perceived story issues, so they know--that in addition to whatever they find--they need to also acknowledge whether my issues are legit or "just me."

That's my process. While I don't like brainstorming my concepts with other people, I love brainstorming other people's ideas. Yes, it's a double standard.

Dear Readers, if you're questing for sources of feedback, the first question you must ask yourself is "what do I want from the people with whom I'm sharing my ideas/work?" Be honest; otherwise, you're in for a boatload of butthurt on both sides. Some authors need adulation, encouragement, and positive feedback only. They're not emotionally prepared for someone to respond with constructive criticism. Similarly, the "constructive" part of criticism is a skill that requires practice. Tact and tone are hard to convey in "track changes." If you're open to critique, great, but everyone has different thresholds and tolerances for how much and how phrased. Communication is key to fine-tuning any relationship. It's okay to say, "Hey, this [specific example] is a little harsh for me. Next time, it'd be easier for me to hear the feedback couched like [specific example]."

So, the short bitchy answer to this week's question is: I trust people who've proven their value. Everything else is DNGAF.

Ruling Your Fantasy World

Presidential or Kingly? Democracy or Monarchy? How do I decide what sort of authority rules my worlds?

Mostly it's decided by who and how my protagonist is oppressed. Is there a single shot-caller who can be toppled or is it a complex network established by need/skill? Is the society established and entrenched, or is it developing?  Am I building a fantasy world on top of a real one?

That last question might seem silly, but I write Urban Fantasy where the local tattoo parlor is a front for a battalion of Berserkers and a leather-daddy at the gay bar is an archangel. If I want the reader to believe the story is happening in the USA then I have to use the existing government of our republic; unless I explain the authority relevant to my protagonist is not the human government but a representative body of superpowers in which there are committees and a chairperson. Human governments of all varieties are a minor subset of the greater authority...which is what I did in my Immortal Spy UF series. In short, if writing contemporary fantasy using the real world as the backdrop, you can either leverage existing authority or you need to offer a reason for why/how your characters are bypassing it.

My High Fantasy works are more diverse in that the societies being changed vary in population, environment, history, traditions, and internal vs external strife. A semi-isolated civilization where there are rumors and vagaries of hostile neighbors yet everything within the society is strictly controlled lends itself to a monarchy. However, a nomadic society struggling to survive extreme scarcity where the nomads are not the top of the food chain is more suited to tribal democracies where leadership is decided by those who are led.

Messing with authority is crucial to my stories, so I like to use different types of government for my protagonists to rebel against.

Bad Habits of Writing: The Beloved Words

What, oh what, had babits do I have in my writing? What things do I do over, and over, and over in my books, regardless of genre?

Dear reader, I have a list of Beloved Words that I overuse. It's a long list. During the drafting phase, my focus is on getting the story told; very "put words on page" versus getting hung up on selecting unique actions that demonstrate emotions. I can get lost in the weeds in an instant, massaging a single sentence for weeks as deadlines shoot past me. It's not something of which I am proud.

Then again, I'm not proud of the 142 occurrences of eye rolls, arm pats, growls, chuckles, or really any of the hundred+ go-to phrases I flog. Really bad is when those beloved words appear on the same page...more than twice. ~cringe~

Policing my beloved words is 100% my least favorite part of editing. I do it; otherwise, I'd have to retitle my works to "The Book of Batted Lashes, Volume 16."

To those readers who catch beloved phrases I don't realize I have: Sorry. I'm trying to be less annoying.

Writing Schedule: When, How Often, How Many Lives Ended for Interrupting...

Oh, okay, maybe not that last one.

My writing schedule is "whenever my mind can settle," which is first-ish thing in the morning and again in the late afternoon/evening. There's a ritual involving dog care and coffee that has to happen before writing or I end up with 60lbs of wriggling fur all up in my personal space. I don't do late night writing sprints because my brain is pudding by then. If real-world stuff has to happen, then it has to happen before noon so I can hit the mental pocket in the second window of productivity.

I like to get my analytical stuff done in the morning (that includes editing, reviewing marketing, budgeting, etc). I do my best creative stuff in the evening (drafting, ad development, social media, etc.). I take a break every two hours at the dog's insistence (plus, it's good for that whole "don't be too sedentary lest pulmonary embolisms" thing). I do this 7-days a week, 10 months a year. Twice a year, I schedule 30-day no-writing vacations (except for this blog, obvi.).

I am a hardcore creature of habit, so anything that interrupts THE PLAN OF THE DAY will have me shifting from Smeagol to Gollum in a nanosecond.

My motto: Spontinantiy is fine, as long as it's planned.

10 Tips for Fight Scenes

Fight! Fight! Fight!

~ehem~

I write fight scenes way more often than I write sex scenes. Matter of fact, my published books don't have sex scenes--unless the protag walks in on an intimate moment. A kiss here and there, sure. My stories do, however, have fight scenes. Lots of fight scenes but not too many; I'm not writing the Expendables. ~rimshot~ Plus, kicking ass is exhausting and characters need time to recover.

10 Rules of Fight Club Scenes
(Okay, they're not rules; they're tips)

1. The types of fights should escalate over the course of the story. Don't deploy the full arsenal early unless your story is about what comes after the fight (aka apocalyptic aftermath).
2. Bigger isn't always better. The climactic battle doesn't have to be El Cid's army charging down the mountains. Sometimes it's two gals in a doorway and only one knife. 
3. The protag's ultimate goal is what matters in the fight. The question isn't who's the better combatant; it's can the protag get what they're after.
4. Fights should reveal the strengths and weaknesses of the characters. Physical, emotional. Privileges, biases, even caste/class if that's part of your world.
5. Weaknesses should absolutely be used against the characters until they become strengths.
6. Consequences must happen, both personal and environmental. Something changes within the character and in those around them. That ought to include negative consequences. 
7. The costs are way more interesting than the celebrations. Personal costs and mission costs.
8. The hero cannot always win.
9. Winning leads to bigger problems.
10. Don't punch down.

There you have it, my 10 Tips for Fight Scenes. If your challenge is visualizing the conflict and putting it into words, then turn on the TV. Find a few shows that have scenes similar to what you think you want to write, and describe out loud the blow-by-blow action happening on the screen. Start with the set, then the staging, then the attire, then the action, then the actor's reactions. Don't forget the smell that's probably there even though Smell-O-Vision hasn't happened yet. Every detail, you put into words. Definitely want to do that writing exercise at home, alone, with the remote in hand. Feel free to get up an reenact what you see. Yes, it's hard to put into words what we see and hear coming from our entertainment centers. 

Good luck! 

Story Starter: Conflict

My most frequent story starter...is a vague concept of a conflict. A broad view that's mushy and loosely defined. It often is rooted in emotion; be it restlessness, resentment, retribution, or reconciliation. There's usually some sort of injustice at the core (in today's real world, how can you escape it, right?).

From there it moves to character. Who is feeling these things? Who is most impacted by the situation? Who is in a position to affect change? Who stands to lose the most? Gain the most? Be damned either way, but die if nothing changes?

Then Why has to be answered.
Then Why Now.
Then How.
Then With Whom.
Then Despite Whom.
Then Where.
Then What Magic.

Then...then I have a concept that kicks off an outline around a conflict that builds a complex plot for complicated characters.