Monthly Archives: April 2010

“Every decision you make – every decision – is not a decision about what to do. It’s a decision about *Who You Are*. When you see this, when you understand it, everything changes. You begin to see life in a new way. All events, occurrences, and situations turn into opportunities to do what you came here to do.”
  – Neale Donald Walsch

How true is the above quote?  Are we really defined by our actions?  If you are doing something wrong, you hope you are not defined by that action.  However, others can’t see what is on our inside, what we are thinking; they only see what we do.

How often do you read a news report about an alleged pedophile and think, “He needs to be locked up and the cell welded shut”?  How often do you open your wallets to a charity that helps kids, homeless, or victims of a natural disaster?  Why is that?  We don’t know who those people are inside.  We don’t know the motivations for each action.  But we do know what the actions are.

When you are developing a character, it is much the same.  You may have a character that is defined by what they think, but that would only be your main character.  The others are defined by what they do and say. 

Our readers are going to have good and bad thoughts about characters based upon the character’s conversations and reactions to situations.  So, if you are going to show the character saying or doing something, do it intentionally.  Every action, every decision, will define who they are.

Every now and then I get asked what I am reading.  The answer today is Ender’s Shadow.  If you asked that question a week and a half ago, it would have been the same answer.  My reading list backlog is massive.  People have started asking, “Why do you take so long to read a book?”  I have been wondering that as well, and I just figured it out.  I take so long to read a leisure book because I am reading several other books at the same time.

At night I have been reading Max Lucado books to my wife.  These chapters are short, but they are aloud and often interrupted by my 10 week old baby.

During my lunches and right after work, I have been reading Baiting Evolution by Julie Fontes, The Faraday Cage by C. Michael Fontes, and Alex by Paula Wright.  These are the works and members of my small group (there is actually another member, but she has yet to attend one of our meetings – you know who you are… you’re still invited).  This is slow because it isn’t pleasure reading, but critique work that takes time.

And the last piece that I am reading is The Open Door, by the great and magnificent, cough, cough <turns red> me.  I am going through it over and over as I listen to suggestions and make edits.  When I think I am ready to submit to small group, I read it aloud (as per a suggestion by the missing member).

Every week I go through 20 to 30 thousand words between reading my group’s submissions and preparing my own.  While I do feel like I am missing out on a fair share of pleasure reading, I wouldn’t give up my group reading for the, um, cough… well, I can’t say ‘the world’… but you know, I won’t give it up easily.

So to answer the question, I am reading great authors of yesteryear and today along with the greats of tomorrow (don’t you love how I lumped myself in there?).

I had a multi-day conversation with two of my writing friends (Chris Fontes, owner of TheWritePodcast.com, and töff, founder of the Fresno Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers); yes, the conversation spanned days.  In fact, it is still going.  It was interesting to me because we touched on summarizing, info dumping, description, dialogue, inner dialogue, narration, action, mannerisms, and sentence structure – all in trying to define ‘showing versus telling.’

What I found was that we were all intelligent people, and we had three completely different ideas about telling.  Of course, I liked my version best, but that isn’t to say that I can’t learn from their views.  The great part about it was that we could all defend our viewpoints very well.

My version had one rule with four subparts.  Basically I believe one should avoid generalizations where possible including:

• Never use an adverb that generalizes a behavior
  1. He clumsily walked
  2. His joking mannerism
• Use caution with adjectives that introduce personal or cultural biases and preferences
  1. He had a kind face
  2. Her beautiful hair…
• Never tell the readers what someone is feeling
  1. My anger boiled
  2. Her shame…
• Action needs to be shown through specific events and dialogue
  1. They took their positions
  2. The truck plowed through cars…

Chris tried (and is still trying) to boil down his view to one rule, but he admits that he hasn’t worked out everything yet:

• If you have a sentence with only a linking verb, and you are not summarizing, it is telling

Töff used a visual technique to define his viewpoint.  I am paraphrasing, but it goes something like this:

• Imagine a stage.  What can the audience see?  Not thoughts.  Not inner feelings.  Don’t tell those.  They see action, description, facial expressions, and behaviors and they can hear dialogue.  That is what you can show the reader.

Initially, my viewpoint really worked well with töff’s, but not always.  Mine did not match up well against Chris’.  However, if I implemented my version of showing with Chris’, then we had something that read well.  This is because Chris’ rule has much more to do with how the reader is being told/shown the story while töff and my rules have more to do with what the reader is being told/shown.

The more I combine the rules, the more I liked it.  With the combination of all three, the characters became dynamic, the settings vivid, and the characters and setting connected.

While I still don’t always agree with Chris’ show/tell rule, or töff’s for that matter, I do see where all the rules in unison can be used to make well crafted scenes and stories.

I would love to hear other viewpoints or clarifications on the topic.

• It is hard to work while others play
• Sometimes a rejection letter isn’t a bad thing
• There’s never a camera available to capture the best moments
• Double check your equipment
• The speed of the clock arm is inversely proportional to the number of times you look at it
• A phrase by Ellen DeGeneres that can really come back to bite you: “Procrastinate today, don’t put it off until tomorrow!”
• Just because I know it doesn’t mean I always get it right (no matter how much I wish it did)
• Babies’ two-month birthdays are not very nice

• If someone always writes hand written messages and visits people’s homes for dinner, what type of person would you picture?  Would you visualize an older or younger person?
• If someone is sexting, texting, and consistently on the cell phone, would you picture someone in their 60s or someone under 25?
• If someone emails, uses cell phones, and IMs, do you see someone you know?  Do you see someone who lives or works in a city, is between 15 and 55, and has consistent access to the internet?
• If someone is making video calls, visiting blogs, and emailing, what comes to mind?  Do you see a tech savvy adult, who is either a business person or hobbyist of some sort?

Why is that?  Because ways to communicate has been changing and expanding at a quick pace.  This era (2000-2010) has more diversity in communication technology than any other time in history, and some may die out in the next few years.  Different generations and social classes have locked into specific modes of communication. 

While I am obviously going to be making generalizations and playing with stereotypes, I think you will see my point.  This is kind of the 2010 over-generalization primary forms of communication related to age/social class (you can bicker in the comments if you like):

• Drawings – young children that have been traumatized, architects, fashion designers, and crime scene investigators
• Walkie-talkies – kids
• Journals – teen girls
• Sexting – younger, more risqué people
• Social (online) games – teens and young adults, mostly males
• Video Calls – richer, more likely to be young business men
• vidBlogs – younger, dynamic, high-energy people
• Text – younger, mostly in cities, hipper
• Consistently on Cell – normally people younger than 35
• Instant Messaging – people with consistent access to the web
• Social Networks – baby boomers to kids
• Blogs – normally business/special interest people, age independent
• E-Mail – average / common adults for today 15-55
• Occasionally on Cell – average / common adults for today 15-55
• Pagers – In 1990 it was drug dealers, then medical field, then everyone, now back to just medical field
• Home Phone – non-techie people
• CBs – On-the-go business communications and hobbyists
• In Person Visits – family/church oriented people, normally older
• Hand Written Mail – almost exclusively seniors

I’m sure there are tons of methods that I forgot (and one that I purposefully excluded).  And you may disagree with the specifics of any one, or many, categories.  These are just to form guidelines for this snap-shot of history, April 14, 2010. 

When you introduce a new character, you can give them a very specific feel by describing how they are communicating.  They work effectively if you combined them.  Take these examples:

• John looked at the incoming text on his phone and slammed the privacy shield closed on his computer’s web cam.  The incoming message read, “OMG!  CANT BLIEVE U TALKD ME N2 THIS.  SHOW NE1 – UR D.E.A.D!”  John smiled as he shuffled over to his bed, flipping through the pictures Amber sent.
• John shook his friends’ hands as he backed out of the doorway.  “Sorry I have to leave so soon.  I know I don’t come by enough these days.  But I have to get these letters to the post office and Amber will be having supper on soon.”

If you can see the difference, then many of your readers will also.  While communication mode isn’t enough to solely describe your characters, it is a powerful enhancement to other forms of description.

For your writing challenge this week, try to find as many ways as possible to describe John’s leaving a conversation with anonymous friends to give attention to Amber.  Remember to use forms of communication to help define the age and social status of your characters.

Well, I went to group last night.  It was interesting. 

Our group has a gag rule – no explaining.  Someone asked about the history of my characters.  On the third time she questioned, I answered – what seemed like a really long answer.  It was not something I should have done.  Afterward, I was thinking, what happened to the no explaining rule?  Why did she question?  Why did I answer?  Why didn’t anyone stop me?  Then the leader of the group said, “But none of that is going into the story and doesn’t need to” – or something like that.  I had tainted my group for the next read.  Oh well.

I got some comments that I expected.  It was unfortunate that I couldn’t address those issues before the submission deadline.  I have lots of good excuses for the condition of my submission, but I still wish I had more time to work out those issues before I submitted.

I also got some comments that I didn’t expect which were very helpful.  Those are the type of comments that I need a group for.  Comments like:

• Tighten this
• Drop that
• Describe
• Really?
• I can’t buy this
• Why is there no action is in this discussion?
• Why is there no discussion in this action?
• I need more here

I love those.  I can handle those especially when I can see where the reader is coming from.  Since I have everything in my mind, I don’t always see what is missing or where I may have left too much.

I got a series of comments that was a little troubling.  I don’t know how to address those comments.  It is more fear than anything I guess.  They want me to toy with style.  Style is tricky because it has to be consistent.  It is also scary because I don’t know if I can do what they recommend.  I don’t want to make it worse.

Wish me luck, as my editing begins tomorrow.

Today will be the first time since December 15th that I will go to an FSFW critique meeting.  I actually had a hard time sleeping three of the last four nights, and part of that was my anticipation of the upcoming meeting.  I am both excited and nervous.  My submission was a little rushed (because my baby and a deadline came too close together), so there will be more errors than normal.  There are also several new people in the group this year and a few of them might be at this meeting.  It should be fun, maybe a little chaotic, and hopefully helpful. 

Wish me luck – both for the meeting, and for calming down enough to do some work today.

Just added Google Friend Connect.  Don’t know if it works yet.  Please tell me if there are any problems.

I really, absolutely, and completely do NOT want to be at work today.  I am in a writing mood.

What the story is about, its pace, where it’s going, and the plot are all obviously important as well, but the characters are the people the reader is “travelling” with, and the importance of them being not only believable, but interesting, cannot be overstated.  – Marea E. Johnson

One of my friends recently got torn up in a writers group because of his characters – they weren’t real to the other readers.  This bothered him (and me).  I thought about it a lot - a lot more than I want to admit. 

How would I react if someone told me that one of my characters, who I can visualize so clearly, is not believable?  That would be heart breaking.  It would be like someone telling me that one of my friends or family members is just a figment of my imagination.

So I tried to think of what makes a character believable to me, as a reader, and I came up with a short list.  A character must be:

• Well defined/developed – Do I understand where the character is coming from?  Has the writer done her/his homework about the characters past and present condition?  Has he/she conveyed the necessary information to me for me to understand the character?
• Consistent in reactions/rationale – Consistency doesn’t mean unchanging.  In fact, for me, it means the opposite when talking about a character.  Based on what I know of the character, do events change her/him/it in a way I can expect or at least understand?  Does the character’s thoughts and actions start at one point and develop at a rate that would be, well, believable?
• Within my experience – This is out of your hands.  If I have never met a person who matches your character, then he/she/it may never be believable.  For example:  I can understand physical pain.  I can understand giving into pain or continuing through it.  I can’t understand someone being trained to ignore pain.  I guess it happens; boxers and other fighters have to do it to an extent and even cooks might do it (hot pans, popping grease, etc).  But I haven’t done it and I don’t really know anyone that has been trained to do it.

That was my short list – the list before I decided that I needed to research.  After hours and hours of research spanning days and months and… (“Wait, wait, wait!  Didn’t you say ‘recently’?”).  Okay, I did a fair amount of research and found that my initial thoughts were not far off from what other writers and professors are recommending.

First, do your homework.  Develop the character until it/he/she comes alive.  I am a big proponent of character outlines – if not a physical one, at least a really good mental one.  However, I found some really good ideas online for more creative ways to developing your character:

• Lou Belcher recommends writing “a resume for each character,” and Jeff Heisler would have you “interview your character.”  These are great ideas, especially when put together.  You would get some history, skills, and geography from the resume and some personality from the interview.  Mahalo.com says to “Ask the hard-hitting, interesting questions, the things that most people don’t know” in the interview.  If done well, I can see where excerpts could be applied directly to the manuscript. 
• Hyacinth Winters asks writers to create a “character’s shopping list.”  This isn’t a grocery list, but a total shopping list.  You get an idea of a characters personality by what they buy, the other of things on the list, where they shop, how much they intend to spend, etc.  I would take it one step further and actually include what it is like to shop with them.  How do they interact with others?  Do they research their buys?  Do they read every label?  Do they try and pick up people at the store?  Oh, the questions just keep going.
• The article, “Create interesting and believable fiction characters” on essortment.com, says, “The best way to create believable yet interesting characters is to observe real people.”  I couldn’t agree more.  In the past I have recommended the same thing on other people’s blogs.  This is probably the most basic and fundamental part of doing homework as a writer – draw from reality.

Second, be consistent.  Consistency can be defined as “a harmonious uniformity or agreement among things or parts” and having the qualities of “reliability or uniformity.”  In writing, it is keeping your character in character and keeping your characters in line with other characters.

• Charles Bobbitt says, “They are believable because they all obey one simple rule: they act and think and talk in ways that are consistent with who (or what) they are.”  That doesn’t say they don’t change, events change people, but people normally don’t change without an event.
• Allen Teal adds, “Try not to make any character stand out too far above his or her counterparts. If you want to endow such a character with extraordinary abilities, the source of those abilities needs to be clearly revealed.”  I had never thought about this part, but it is so true.  When friends say, “I can do this…” or “I have done that…,” I don’t believe them.  I suspend belief until they ‘show me’ or at least explain the events that lead to them having the ability.  Writers have to do that for their readers – every time.

Third, the reader’s previous experience. I found zmkc’s comment on D. G. Myers’ blog:

Is there any way to formulate why some people are immensely attractive? I don’t think so – and I think your question about what makes characters believable is a similar kind of inquiry. Some things are indefinable – at least in the abstract.

I agree.  How can you define something that changes from reader to reader?  D. G. Myers’ full post - http://dgmyers.blogspot.com/2010/03/believable-character.html – explains my last point better than I can (it’s short, go read it).  It is up to the reader to believe the character you created.  No matter how much homework you do beforehand, no matter how well you relay that information to the written word, and no matter how consistent you are, there will be some people that just won’t believe while others will completely get it.

So, do your homework and develop the characters before you start writing, have consistent characters, and don’t worry too much if a few people don’t always get them – others will.