About That Plot Outline

Well, I promised you a post about plot outlining, and here’s how it’s going:

*snoooooorrrrrre*

I suppose that's not entirely true. In truth, I’m excited about it. First let’s work on some definitions. By “plot outlining” I mean: figuring out how long it should take the cast to move from one town to the next, all the way through the entire book, based on the plot I have so far. By “cast” I mean: the main characters.

So now this should be a really fun book. Unconvinced? Here’s why: all that crap I worked on as far as how long it should take the cast to move from one town to the next, all the way through the book? You don’t have to read it. I have an Excel sheet with the “calendar” I’ve created for my world, with dates of when the cast goes through each area, and it keeps track (well, I can keep track by looking at it anyway) of where they are, and when. All the book needs to do is progress the characters, setting, and theme.

Unfortunately, I didn’t really flesh this out in my first novel. You remember that novel, the one that’s locked up in a chest where I can’t get to it for a while? Yeah, that hugely successful one. And yes, there’s a shameful amount of word-count tied up with moving characters from one place to the next. Not quite as dry as “then they rode forty days through the forest to get to the other side,” but nearly. Then I realized most literary novels don’t do that. So now, in preparing for this story, I can still work out all my dry, boring, appendix-for-my-son-who’s-not-yet-born-to-publish-y-stuff, and that can stay with me while my readers just get a good book.

In fact, I had a scene running through my mind last night till about 2:30am, so I finally grabbed my notebook and scribbled it down. And I like it. It’s very early in chapter one, or it will be, and it’s definitely a style I want to carry through the entire book. And it even sets up one of my themes. In 101 words, it does that.

So I’m excited. Hopefully I can work on it this weekend, but I also have a short story and a paper due on Tuesday. But, I’ll do what I can.

Stoked.

See you Monday.

The Nature of Rejection and Other Things

So, what’s on tap for today? I’m glad you asked; this is going to be another random-ish post that probably ends up being more of a glimpse into my life than anything concrete about the craft of writing. What can I say, I like to mix it up.

A curious thing happens when five people review your work, I discovered yesterday: it’s either the greatest thing ever, or it’s complete crap. If I would take the negative comments from everyone, I could compile a review that would go something like: “This is a great story, one of the best we’ve read in this class. Except for the main character, the setting, a little bit of the plot, and the theme – strengthen those.”

Another interesting and related note: when one agent rejected my work, she said that – basically – there’s a ton of books out there with the synopsis I laid out, and the only way it can work is if it is rivetingly told. Keep in mind, she had not read anything of my book. Now, I don’t know about any other writers, but when I write fiction it can be very good; rarely do I write non-fiction without sounding like a dry, dusty old philosopher “well technically, when one truly considers the final analysis, one cannot help but be persuaded….” *snoooooorrrrrrrrre*

So here’s the point, if one can be found: reading is subjective. Profound, huh? I find it nice to remind myself ad nauseam of truths, and this is a good one to be nauseated with. Collectively, my story for class was lackluster/sucked; individually, everyone loved it. Provided you can actually write (oh, let’s not go down that path today, please?) some agent somewhere is going to like what you’ve written. The trick is to find that one, and find them at an agreeable moment when they’re actually open to a story like yours, and writing like yours. Sound difficult? Here’s something more difficult: find an agent/author who doesn’t say breaking into the publishing world is difficult. Go ahead; I’ll wait.

See? Couldn’t do it. I’m not just another pretty face, after all.

I did find time earlier today to scribble the beginnings of a plot outline on a little notepad I keep now after the recommendation (speaking of ad nauseam) of my professor that writers should keep little notepads to write inspirations down on. I definitely like what’s evolving apart from the first chapter I hastily wrote (and subsequently rewrote, and subsequently threw out entirely because it was stupid) long ago because I was so eager to get started writing this thing. Hopefully I’ll have something more developed and concrete when I come back Friday, and you can look forward to reading about that.

So yeah. See you then.

Friday.

A Christian Writer's Goal

For at least the second time in my college career, we’re talking in one of my classes about Christian Criticism for the popular arts. The first time, obviously, was in Critical Approaches to Literature class my sophomore year. And, to be sure, I had an opinion of what Christian Criticism should look like – and no, it didn’t look quite like it did to the author whom we studied. Now, again in Foundations or Christian Thought class, we’re engaging pop culture as we develop a Christian worldview. Here’s what I like and don’t like.

I like recognizing where mainstream culture gets it “right” according to the Christian world-view – which, for the rest of this blog and the rest of my life, I am going to presuppose is True, while recognizing other people have a different “truth.” (Insofar as you, the reader, are not Christian, understand that I will make claims according to what I believe just as you do, and I hope to back them up with evidence, just as you do.) And I think we would do well to recognize, as Christians, that secular thought cannot reach the conclusions we do – namely, the “why” of the evidence we see. A deeply secular – even anti-theistic – person can still study the world and recognize that families with children operate better, on a sociological level, when there are two parents. We should not be surprised, however, when the American Pediatrics Association states that homosexual couples are just as good as heterosexual couples at raising good children. That is, it shouldn’t surprise us when we recognize that the creational structure of family is, in a broader essence, two parents and children. The fact that we need to address homosexuality is a separate issue.

I do not like stopping there; I don’t like authors who write books that simple “comment on reality” because no book only “comments” on reality: it either supports it or tears it down. When a token Christian pops into a movie or book and acts stupidly, it undermines Christianity – unless the book goes further to tie the stupidity to the person, and not the faith; in essence saying: “even if this person were evolutionary Darwinist, they would still be an idiot.”

But even aside from Christianity – any book that ignores some truths and only presents others, leaving the reader with a sense that such and such an idea is “okay” needs to be looked at very critically. And here’s where we need to differentiate two things.

There is, 1: criticism by Christians for Christians; 2: criticism by Christians for non-Christians; 3: written works (fiction, non-fiction, everything else) by Christians for Christians; and 4: written works by Christians for non-Christians. (And then, of course, everything by non-Christians for everyone else: this I leave to their own minds). Depending on what we’re trying to do and for whom, we must adjust our approach.

So, when critiquing a work for Christians, I think we would do well to point out the landmines – those parts of the story that may sound good, but lead astray. If critiquing for non-Christians, it may do well to focus on the parts of the story that show truth, while perhaps questioning if the author goes far enough in their treatment of it.

If, like me, we are Christians writing to non-Christians, writing something that will go in the “Christian” section may not be the best approach. It’s a fine line, but I think we should be okay to show culture as it is while not leaving it at that. Like the criticism, let’s show in our writing that the culture we present is not the end, that there is something to strive for; and that there are things to uphold, and things to do away with. When we write to Christians, we can argue directly from Scripture – and I might even argue if you’re writing specifically to Christians to provoke thought, it would be well not to couch our themes in fiction. The fiction I write is safe for Christians to read in that it does not advance secular values; but it is not intended to grow the true Christian into a stronger follower of Christ.

Ran a little long today; thanks for hanging in there with me. See you Wednesday.

Sketching For Writers

I must admit, doing character sketches might be perhaps the most entertaining part of writing. I’ve just finished a good hour or so of it, and I’m excited. Maybe mostly because I came up with a bunch of individual character traits for each of the three main characters for D:R, and have just spent an hour trying to piece them together – specifically, to build a hierarchy of traits. That is, the revolutionary soldier feels this way because he also feels this way, and that because he feels this way – using only the fifteen traits I wrote out earlier. Now, I fleshed some things out, historical things, that help this bridge to stand; but for the most part is was seeing (and a lot of just figuring out) how all these pieces could fit together. One guy seems completely paradoxical – and still is in the sense that he seems complex but is actually rather simple. Other characters are beautifully 

complex, and it is fun to see how they’re unique in their ways.

Of course, especially fun was listing two identical character traits for completely opposite characters, and then seeing how those traits became manifest uniquely to each. Another kind of pre-emptory thing I do is to create a map and work out some of the history of the place. That lends itself very well to plot, sometimes. Taking both of these concepts together, it’s interesting how much history can fill in the blanks of a novel – the history of the individual character drives their traits, which is going to drive how they interact with one another, and the history of the land drives how the characters will interact with their historical moment.

This is the first time I’m trying something like this – and, lacking any real experience, I feel like it is very right, somehow. I began trying to flesh out the characters of D:F – my abandoned first novel – but that was only after I had the plot almost totally worked out. It became almost secondary. Now, I’m in a position to try this at the very early stages; the plot for D:R is skeletal enough to allow lots of accommodation for character and historical needs.

So, while I personally cannot say for certain how good an idea this is, I think it’s worth the effort to try. There’s never anything wrong with getting to know your characters better. I’ll probably end up doing some character glimpse before truly sitting down to write, but I’m certainly one giant step forward. I’m excited to post that I have chapter one done. Even more excited, of course, to say that the book is done and sent off to agents. Stick around, and we’ll get there together!

See you Monday.

Getting Characters

It’s almost like pick-up sticks, but better; the mass you see to the left are slips of paper with character traits on them, color-coded for their particular character. First, it was just fun writing these things and beginning to discover the characters themselves, and beginning to see how they might relate and come in conflict with one another.

So I begin, once again (I started on this book a while ago, then switched to try to get the first one good; now I’m switching back) diving into book two. Let me do this, for the sake of clarity: when I first conceived this series, it was going to be called the “Destiny” series. The concept was that each book would then be called “Destiny: _____” with one word for the blank. I have since become disenchanted with that idea. Suffice for clarity’s sake that the book I had been working on would have had the initials “D:F” and the book I am switching to would have been called “D:R.” So from henceforth, I will refer to the book I am currently working on as D:R.

That’s out of the way. So there are three characters in D:R; using Microsoft Excel, I made a sheet with each of their names – one in black, one in blue, and one in red – then listed in the cells below some of their traits: how they view each day, and the future; what they love, hate, and fear; and bunch of others things -- about fifteen in total.

The object of this game is to then shuffle or scramble the traits, then pull out two that are different colors and set them below their characters. Then I concoct a scene or snippet in my head where those two traits are present in conversation. And we see what happens.

For instance, it’s easy to think about someone who has a “seize the day” kind of attitude conversing with someone who has an anti “seize the day” kind of attitude; but what happens if, say, someone with a “seize the day” attitude gets in conversation with someone who has lost their identity? What kind of advice might the seizer give the loser? What of someone who loves discourse talking to someone who fears being wrong, but is also a braggart?

The aim of this exercise is to think of your characters in more than simple “pro v. con” attitudes, and helps flesh them out more deeply in your mind – which will, of course, translate on paper. At least, hopefully it does.

Even if you don’t do the scrambled-opposition kinds of things, simply listing for yourself the traits of your characters and considering the implications in your mind can be quite helpful. But I think a great benefit will come from pairing unlikely sets of traits, traits that seem to have nothing in common.

Let me know how it goes, and I’ll do the same. See you Friday.

That Novel

Yesterday was not my best day ever; such things have happened before, certainly, and I’m not saying I’ve received more than my fair share of rejections – I have received far less than my share. It’s still difficult when more than one come on the same day.

The first, from an agent I had on the hook for some time, informed me she does not typically reject authors; however, she would not be interested in seeing this project, however I may re-work it. You know, the project I’ve been slogging away at revising for the past few weeks? The one I started officially ten years ago? That one.

But I’m thinking something here; the wheels have shaken free their dust and are beginning to turn (I don’t know about you, but my wheels get dusty pretty rapidly). I’m considering finishing this major rewrite that I’m doing, making the protagonist not an orphan anymore; maybe doing a run-through and tightening up some scenes (for which I have a few ideas already); but trying to finish within a week or two. Then: burn it.

Not literally, that would be extreme. But print out a copy for posterity, lock it away in a chest somewhere (confession: I have one in my room. I got it probably nine years ago; and it is awesome. It’s pictured above, if you were wondering.); and then, get to work on the next book. Let this novel be that novel; the one I wrote to discover my love for writing and fantasy, to work out a ton of details for the world I seek to create, and the stories I seek to tell.

If you come to this blog to try to follow a writer seeking a publisher, you might be getting a little exasperated right now. Well, first, imagine where I’m at: my baby, who I’ve raised for ten years, is leaving the house and I won’t hear from him for possibly a long time; second, think of this as an opportunity to watch the book-writing process from start to finish. I have a bunch of ideas for book two (or whatever I’m going to call it now), but still a lot of the process is left to be done. (Obviously I won’t be giving details of the plot itself, just processes I undertake to write it entire.)

So, I may be lax in the blogs for a little bit here, until book one is safely tucked away. Ideally, I’ll still blog; just below ideal will be taking off from blogging for the week. I promise I won’t let you hang for more than a week. And we’ll see how things go.

See you Wednesday?

Everything In This Blog Is A Lie

Branching off a little from Wednesday’s post, one of the reasons for the claim of intentional fallacy is the sign/signified split – that is, that the thing is not inherent in the word. I got into a conversation about this with my manager at the bike shop, revolving specifically around foul language. His argument was that, since our culture defines what a “foul” word is, he can reject that and use it; besides that, people don’t have a right to not be offended. Now, leaving aside the latter part of his argument for some other time (or, never might be fine too), let’s focus on this idea that “only culture gives meaning to words.”

Let me begin by saying I don’t disagree with him. To prove my point, just have a butcher’s around British colloquialisms. Or, just look at the one I used; in certain Brit circles, a “butcher’s” means a look around. I’m not sure specifically, but I know the full phrase is “butcher’s hook,” and that Cockneys have a neat little trait of taking a word, coming up with a rhyming phrase, and subsequently using that rhyming phrase instead of the word itself. So, I think, since butcher’s hook and look rhyme...maybe? Hopefully a Cockney friend can clear this up for me, or someone who has a Cockney friend.

That is a clear example of a certain culture assigning meaning to a word that no one else recognizes, without that meaning being expressed to them. My argument with my manager is that we shouldn’t then trivialize culture’s contribution to word meaning. As much as he worships science, his worship is a product of Western culture itself; everything gains “meaning,” at least by degree, from cultural construction. Does the fact that water boils at 212F matter to a tribe in the jungle that we haven’t found yet who are boiling water over a fire to cook meat? If we find them, figure out there language, and tell them; would they care?

If I say “bloody appalling” to you, do you care? You might wonder what is bloody appalling; but a Brit (at least at one time) sees that phrase the same way Americans see “f***ing appalling.” Is the F-word inherently foul? I would say, in certain uses, especially when used, culturally, to specifically denote sex – it is a very degrading word. But just because it matters less to someone does not mean it should not matter more to others.

So I completely reject this notion of “words have no meaning.” While technically true, it is nowhere near functionally true. We debase ourselves and language and culture when we try to live otherwise. Words are the only way we have to express ideas – something which many recognize as the only thing separating us from the rest of the animal kingdom. I have the added motive that God spoke creation into existence. So yes, words are very powerful, and they do have meaning; if they don’t, then I don’t know how you read this far because this is just a bunch of Calibri lines on a page.

In the middle of Chapter 14, now; had to quit to do some homework, in the middle of rewriting a scene. Frustrating. But, moving along. See you Monday.

I'll Give You What For

There comes a time – there just about has to, for all authors – when you ask yourself: why am I doing this? Perhaps some of you, reading about everything I’m going through on the revision of my book, are asking that of me. There is the broad question why do I/you write which may be easier to answer, at least tritely, with: “Oh, I just love writing,” or “I love words” or “I can’t see myself doing anything else!” All of which, to some extent or another, are true with me. I do love writing, and words, and I intend to write this series whether it gets published or not.

But I think a far more interesting and focused question is: “Why are you writing this, particular piece?” Why have I spent this many years of my life working on this novel? Why don’t I abandon it instead of hacking and slashing and rewriting, hour upon hour? Some authors I’ve spoken with talk about characters in their head that won’t go away, and clamor to be put on paper. This, to me, can be somewhat frightening, really; kind of like organized schizophrenia. Others, while having characters, have stories too that won’t leave their minds unless committed to paper. This is approaching a more stomach-able approach, but still borders on the haphazard.

Oh, I admit, there are far “better” stories than mine that have come about by one or both of these processes; but, as I’ve put in quotations, “better” is the operative word. Why are they better? Do they evoke emotion more strongly? Are they more poetic? (By the way, I must do a blog some time about the inordinate privilege given to poetry, but I digress.) Are they more “real”? Are they more true?

Perhaps: but what is it that they do? Why does literature exist? It is a pointless question to ask a true post-modernist, but still a legitimate question I think. In critical analysis, there is what’s called “intentional fallacy,” meaning that trying to ascribe intention to the author is fallacious, because a work of literature exists between the book and the reader. Whatever the author penned is largely irrelevant (though not totally) and what is of true importance is what the reader takes away from the story.

While not entirely subscribing to this theory (insofar as I understand it, that is), it holds some legitimate points; namely, the reader should – if reading it properly – come away with something. The question I have to ask the author, in the throes of character-tantrums and stories that won’t go away, is what are readers going to come away with?

And that’s why I’m writing this story, and why I will write the rest of these stories; because people need to hear it. Their ears are so full of crap from popular media, they need to be shown what I have to tell. But what about not getting published, I hear you ask? Well, I can’t do much about that. But until these words stop knocking against my teeth, I won’t stop writing. And revising. And querying.

See you Friday.

Impromptu Sabbatical

What’s this place called again? Blogspot? What do I do here?

Oh, right. So, you may have noticed, I’ve been away for a while. I suppose I should let you guys know where I’ve been.

I’ve been moving. Not me, personally; moving my fiancée into a new apartment. A really, really nice, new apartment. A word of caution to those who may be considering it: if you’re moving from your parent’s house into an apartment (or house) – so that you don’t actually own anything necessary for owning a home – expect it to cost a lot of money. There’s a lot more going on than the first month’s rent and a security deposit.

So between that and college and writing, this and a few other things in my life have...taken a place of less importance, we’ll say. But the good news (I hope) is I’m back! Fresh bursts of activity on Twitter! Updates on Facebook every day! Blogs three times a week!

And, most importantly, revision on my book. Speaking of which, you should have been there on Friday; it was an insurrection. Funny thing happens when you get rid of one of the foci of your plot; a lot of stuff can get hacked. Chapter Six (I think, you’ll see why I’m not sure soon) had gotten chopped to just over 2,000 words in length. Most of my chapters are between 3.5k and 5~6k; some authors are fine to have little mutant chapters, I am not. Then, I saw that a lot of stuff in chapters one and two were really unnecessary, because of this shift of focus. So, after taking a few moments with the computer off to lay on my bed and gather myself, I tore into them mercilessly.

The end result was this: 4,000 words have been cut from the novel, one chapter got dissolved into the preceding and succeeding chapters, and another chapter got partially added to a previous chapter. Meaning what? The novel is 19 chapters instead of 21. What had been chapter seven is now chapter five, with corresponding chapter-number reductions to the rest of the chapters.

When I wrote the first draft between the ages of 16 and 20, it totaled 164,000+ words. Draft two, written from scratch this spring, was 110,000 words. It is now 96,000. When an author approaches agents with a first novel, 96k looks a lot more attractive than 164k. And I still have half the novel to finish editing.

Now, it won’t be done there. I’m seeing where my protagonist is going to need some extra motivation in order to up the conflict, and that is going to have to come in the first nine chapters. I don’t think it will revive a chapter, but this number is fluid, as is everything prior to publication. But I get good feelings about it.

See you Wednesday.