What I Write

This is to direct people to when they ask about my writing.

Whenever people find out that I am a writer, they always seem to ask the same sorts of questions. And the first one they ask is, "So, what do you write?"

Well, one way to answer that is to say that I write mostly novels, but sometimes novellas, short stories, and (rarely) fanfiction.

But what most people want to know when they say, "What do you write?" is the genres I write in. There's no easy way to answer that question. Novels I have finished in the past include various stories of humor, a children's fantasy, and certain other stories and fragments that I have kept private. I am currently writing three main novels, a humor/fantasy, a political satire, and ya/dystopian.

In my mind, but not on paper, I have a work of realistic fiction and couple of sci-fi novels, with one being more on the fantasy side, and the other a "realistic" sci-fi.

So, that's the easiest answer I can give to that question.

Using a Text Analyzer to Highlight Problems in Word Usage

It is still early to think about editing my trilogy/way-too-long-novel, but I cannot help thinking about how hard it will be. Specifically, it will be hard in making it shorter, since I am not yet two-thirds finished, and it is near 200k.  

One website that I just came across today looks like it will prove to be helpful: text analyzer.

This program is simple: it calculates the frequency of words and phrases. (Note: Scrivener has a feature like this built in, but it always crashes when I try to use it on such a long work.) 

When I ran the entire text of my novel through the text analyzer, there were some embarrassing results. Some of them I already knew about, but there were some problems that surprised me. This tool calculates the frequency of phrases up to eight words long. There were four eight-word-long phrases that appeared four time each. Three of the times, the repetition was intentional. The other time...let's just say I had to keep remaining myself that there is a reason for editing! Four more phrases were used three times each, and twenty-two phrases of eight words used twice! 

And these were badly-written phrases, too. Things like "although most people hate him quite a lot." Both of those instances will have to be removed. If I take out both instances of all twenty-two offending eight-word phrases, that's an easy 352 words. Only a dent in my word count, but there are shorter phrases that can also be taken out.

Then I come to the three-word phrases. This is even more incriminating. The phrase "I don't know" is used 179 times. The top thirty of these phrases occur 2822 times altogether--that is almost 8500 words! 

The list of single words is also enlightening. The top ten words? I, the, to, that, it, and, is, a, of, he. The first word was what I predicted, since the novel is in the first person. Still, it makes up four-percent--a number that should be trimmed down. Most of the other words are excusable, though I will remove them when possible as I edit. There were two words, though, that really need to be removed in most of their occurrences. "That" is used too often, and it is usually unnecessary. I also have a bad habit of using the word "and" to begin sentences.  The removal of most uses of these two words will make my novel five percent smaller!

This text analyzer is going to be a great help for me in the editing process.

Experimenting with Multiple Viewpoints in Fiction II

The second form of multiple viewpoints that I would like to address is that of the "Cinematic Shift." Practically, this is similar to the "Convenience Shift", which I described in the previous post. 

In convenience, the author introduces viewpoint shift and multiple viewpoint characters as it furthers the plot. As I mentioned, the main flaw with it is the temptation to introduce too many viewpoint characters.

"Cinematic Shift" is a more planned approach. It receives its name because it is the way that films tend to work. Lord of the Rings is a prime example of this. In The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo is the only real viewpoint character. Once we are at The Two Towers, there are three groups of viewpoint characters. This becomes more like two groups of viewpoint characters by The Return of the King. 

"Cinematic Shift" is the idea of carefully planned shifts in viewpoint to add suspense and complexity. 

I am currently working on this in one of my WIPs. In the novel, there are two viewpoint characters. It's hard to explain without talking about the plot, but it is more-or-less planned to use this type of shift. The "camera" flips back and forth (thought not in every chapter) from one character to the other. In a couple of chapters at the beginning, and the entire end, these characters are together. That introduces the main flaw, as I see it, in "Cinematic Shift."

In a film, you do not know the thoughts of the characters, for instance. Sometimes the film makers try to show them to us, but that tends to fail. In writing, though, we usually do see the thoughts of the viewpoint characters. We know "personal" things about them that a viewer would not see if the book was made into a movie. 

We see that in a novel it does not work to just observe the characters. But say you have two viewpoint characters sharing a scene? When I was young, working on my first stories, I never gave it much thought at all. Of course you jump around. Right? But in more recent times, my personal research has shown that it can be a source of enmity between authors. Some writers might think that it is too jarring. Others (such as myself) do not worry much about it.

This is one of the times when the author to make the decision. Some of your readers will like the way that you choose. Others will not. That's the way it always is.

There are a couple of important things to keep in mind. One, do not merely write the same story twice from the perspective of two different characters. And, two, let the reader know somehow how your viewpoint shift is going to work.

In first person narrating, there are a host of additional concerns, as two (or more) viewpoint characters might even be switching narrating the story! But that is a topic for later discussion. 

Experimenting with Multiple Viewpoints in Fiction I

Multiple viewpoints are a useful way to add layers and complexity to a novel--as long as the transition and type of shift are written well.

Up until recently, I had never planned to write a multiple-viewpoint novel. The thing that came the closest to that was A Corgi Tale, a couple of years ago. At several points in that story, one of the three main characters is separated from the others, and the third-person narrator describes their thoughts and actions one at a time.

That sort of shifting viewpoint can be thought of as "Convenience Shift"--characters are put into the spotlight as it works to enhance the plot. This works well enough, though there is one major problem with this type of multiple viewpoints. That is, that it is possible for a writer to create a character just for a single scene, and then have that character as the narrator. 

On a forum, one of the members posted something that has stuck with me for months. An author (I don't think it mentioned who, but if it has, I have forgotten it) created the character of a janitor in a building. This janitor became the main character for a brief scene. The reader "observes" this new viewpoint character as he cleans, opens a closet, and is murdered by a criminal hiding in the closet. That was the entire use of the janitor, even as a viewpoint character!

That scene would have worked if there had been another character, one that was a common viewpoint character, that had observed the murder.

Writers, viewpoint shift can be hard for the reader. Do not change viewpoint without a good reason for doing so. And there may well be a good reason. Just make sure that it is worth risking possible confusion and frustration for your readers!

Tomorrow's post will describe the two other types of multiple viewpoint.  

More Fun with Misused Words!

I always have to be careful not to misuse words. Growing up hearing such words and phrases as "arguably" or "I can't believe..." or "hopefully" used illogically, it has been a struggle. Not only do I have to keep catching myself before saying such pathetic things as, "Hopefully, it will not rain on Saturday", but I have to endure hearing those phrases and adverbs misused by much of the general public.

But as I cannot change others, I strive to change myself.

Are you with me? Do you want to purge from your own speech words that you misuse, or, worse, words with meanings that you do not understand? 

Daily Writing Tips, one of my favorite websites, has this profitable category: http://www.dailywritingtips.com/category/misused-words/. Such lists as that make me vow to reform. And make me hate those misused words even more...

Anyway, I have enjoyed going through those posts, which probably explain the misuse of words and terms way better than I would. 

Abbreviations and Terms that Writers Use

Before I write anything else on this blog, I felt that I should include a note about some writing jargon. I'll be using a lot of these terms in future posts, mainly because I am just used to writing and thinking about these terms.

Since I was not interested in the extra work (and because there was no obvious benefit other than neatness) this is not in alphabetical order. Following each term, there is a sentence showing how that term is used. The examples are quite silly, and not necessarily factual regarding me and my writing.

This is not an exhaustive list. Not that you would have thought that it was, I just wrote that because that is the normal thing to do in lists of this type. Another one of those things that "goes without saying." (The quotation marks right there are to show that I know it is a cliche!)

May you be enlightened!

WIP(s): Work In Progress. This is probably a well known term when typed out, especially since it is no only writers that use it. But I am including it here because the pronunciation can be confusing. It is pronounced the same as the word "whip." If it comes up in conversation, as with all homophones, the context will show the meaning. "Yesterday I wrote nine thousand words in my WIP...then deleted seven thousand of them."

MC(s): Main Character. "My MC is an alien that lives 'somewhere in space between Neptune and the moon,'"

MMC/MFC or FMC: Main Male Character/ Main Female or Female Main Character. This can help differentiate when talking about your MCs. And using the terms does not mean that the novel/story that the MCs are in is a romance. "The scene where my MMC first meets my FMC is awkward."

Fan Fiction/FanFic: a piece of writing (usually short) that features the characters (and sometimes situations) from a popular novel, film, or TV series. The more popular the story, the more FanFics are written about it. I don't write FanFics, but my brother writes them extensively. "The 'Barney the Dinosaur' FanFics appeal only to a very select demographic."

POV: Point Of View. This is another one that you probably know, but I added it to increase the length of my list. "The chapter from the POV of 'Ralph', the junky car stuck up on cinder blocks, probably doesn't add a lot to my novel, but it was a lot of fun to write."

Limited Third Person: the narrator speaks about the perspective of a single character (at least a one time), and only knows the thoughts of that character. Many writers use this form of third person writing, as it helps keep focus on one character, and it helps build suspense, since we don't know what the other characters are doing. (I know I'm not explaining that very well.) "The novel was written in the limited third person, which makes sense, because the MC was the only character that was neither dead nor un-dead."

Grey character: a character that you want the reader to feel "conflicted" about. He might be more "good" or more "bad", but is a mixture of both. As his arc progresses, the reader's opinion of him might change. "I feel conflicted about one grey character, because although he assassinated the governor and several officials, he almost died rescuing a small child from a rabid chihuahua."

Anti-hero: like a grey character, except the reader is supposed to be "on" the anti-hero's side. The anti-hero has strong moral or personality flaws, but he is really a "good guy." And we want him to win. "My MC is an anti-hero--he's always driving recklessly through down-town areas."

When I started out making this list, I thought that it would be longer, but it wasn't. Maybe I'll add to it later. I probably will, But I hope that this is enough for any readers that do not know a lot of writing terms to understand my writing.

Books vs Ebooks or, What is a Book?

I often see things on Pinterest, and various writing or book websites, that bring up the infamous "debate" over the books-versus-e-readers.

I put "debate" in quotation marks, because I have rarely seen what could be called a fair debate. Most people approach the the issue from the standpoint that "Real books are better than Kindle/ebooks. Period. Exclamation mark." Then they might be really clever and have a list of all the "good things" about a Kindle. And then say that despite all that, "real books" are infinitely better than ebooks because they look, feel, and smell like books.

Now, I approach this issue as a person who has read countless "real books" and few electronic books. I don't own a Kindle, but I do have a couple of friends who have. So I believe that I can be a fair judge of the issue.

In this post, I'm not really going to do a pros and cons list, like so many websites have already done. Rather, I have one question? What is a book? Does the word "book" mean a "real book", on paper, or does it mean the story that is contained either with ink or electronic pictures of letters? It is a real question.

If someone asked me, "Have you read Corgi Critter's Conquests?" I would know right away that that means, "Have you read this certain book?" And if I had read it in a "real book", or on a Kindle, or online as long as I had read those words, I could truthfully say that I had read it.

This is a love of books for the sole reason that they are not electronic. Or that is at least how I see it.

Maybe these same purists would say that writing should be done on typewriters, or by hand. These days, that is probably not practical. I sometimes struggle to understand this whole hatred of technology that some people seem to have. I mean, take video games, for example. Many parents love to hate on video games. But if a kid is playing an intellectually-stimulating online game, then why is that worse than play any other non-active game? And if the video game is pointless and ridiculous,  that is no worse than playing Candy Land  or Sorry or Trouble, right? Or any other roll-the-dice or draw-the-cards game.

OK, that doesn't have much to do with books. I just hate games of pure chance.

But back to books. You know, I have been reading a book and thought "Ohhhh, this smells so good!" Maybe I'm just not observant of such things, or many it's because I've had little contact with books that are either especially new or old. But I have reveled in the smell of many a DVD case. Sad, when I think about it.

And I don't love the feel of a book. I mean, it's a book. It's just like the way things are. Paper with words on it.

I've seen a lot of PBS documentaries in my life time. If there is ever a topic like "What is the smartest animal?" or "Is there life on another planet?" then there is usually fifty minutes talking about that question. And then a disappointing ending saying, basically "we don't know" or "maybe, maybe not." That's kind of how this blog post feels to me.

So my opinion is that it is not the medium that counts in books, but the content. A good story is good whether there is paper or electronics behind the words. It's just words.

Note: I also don't sympathize with the people who literally use the word "murder" to describe ruining a book. Comments on Pinterest are commonly in this direction. A lamp made with old books is "senseless murder." A hollowed-out Harry Potter, used to hide small objects, is a horrible thing! And any picture or art project with a written-on book is evil.

Books are just books.