In most fantasy stories today, the most common form of government is either a monarchy or an emperor. To me, it has been very much overdone, as there are so many other forms of government that exist that could be used. Though I admit I broke my own rule for my story "War of Magic," where the setting is in an empire with an emperor, though there are other political or non-political parties involved too.
Nonetheless, here is a short list of some other governments that writers should use for their writing (this list came from The History Guy website):
Anarchy- I don't recall seeing this one very often, but you could have no form of government. It could be a dog-eat-dog world of chaos and lawlessness, which could lead to an interesting setting and/or plot.
Communism- I think American writers generally avoid this one because we associate it with countries like Russia and China and because it's non-democratic. Nonetheless, it could lead to some interesting stories (I think of Orwell's "1984" and Martin Cruz Smith's "Gorky Park when I think of settings with totalitarian communist governments).
Confederacy- This one is not very common, as it's not a common form of government. Because of my Southern heritage and because I sympathize more with the South than with the North (but let's not get into that discussion), I've tried using this form of government before, though none of the stories have succeeded plot-wise. This would be an interesting government because there would be no king or federal government, just local rulers in alliance with each other.
Constitutional- this could be democracy or monarchy, where either the democratic government is limited by a constitution or the monarchy is. I don't see this one much either, but it would certainly put an interesting twist on the traditional view of an absolute monarch.
Oligarchy- basically the government is made up of high-ranking people or those with lots of wealth. Interesting alternative to a monarchy.
Theocracy- this one is not looked upon favorably because of most people's stance on religion today, in how they believe religion and government should be separate. So I don't this one very often. But in a story, it could be done well and in an interesting way, provided it doesn't become preachy.
Dictator- most stories seem to have some form of a tyrant who is a ruler, but it is generally a king or an emperor. Several countries in the world today have dictators in power but aren't kings or emperors, so why not create a fantasy world with such men or women?
This is only a short list of the types of government that exist out there. But don't feel compelled to use the typical monarchy or emperor-rule that most writers do. Perhaps you could try a different form of government, combine a few existing ones together, or even make up your own. There are plenty of options, so take advantage of them.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
The Medieval World
Most modern writers and authors, when writing their stories, love to create a world that is very Medieval-esque. I could rant on how much this is overdone, but I will restrain from that and focus on something else. Ever since September, I have been taking a Western Civilization history class, and for the past few weeks the teacher has been talking about the Medieval time period, which has gotten me thinking about Medieval fantasy worlds. My problem with Medieval worlds is that they tend to be more or less stereotypical glances of the real Medieval time period and this makes them vastly unrealistic.
Here are some examples of how writers need to do more research if they want to do a Medieval-esque world.
Monarchies:
Most Medieval fantasy stories focus on a king who is running the political show. The king is usually very powerful and is from a long dynasty, and he generally has few to no rivals. However, looking at the Medieval period, this is not the case. Kings were actually fairly weak in power, and dynasties were quick to rise and fall. Most kingdoms were actually more under the control of powerful noble families, and sometimes these families could completely take over and start a new royal dynasty. Kings also did not have very much power, as the whole "Divine Right of Kings" and absolutism would not show up for a few more centuries. Kingdoms were also not very stable. Nobles were constantly feuding for the throne, especially if a king was deposed or died without an heir; The War of Roses is a good example of this.
But also, people in the Medieval times were semi-independent, relying on the Feudal System's structure. Nobles managed their estates and those of their vassels, taking taxes from them, and kings interfered very little with this. And, as I said earlier, nobles were really the ones in control, not the kings.
In conclusion, Medieval kings were sometimes powerful, but they were also weak. They were constantly battling the powerful noble families, and kingdoms were thus very unstable because of those political structures.
Social structures:
Another common misconception of the Middle Ages is the entire social structure. People imagine the whole system of peasants/ serfs, knights, the church, and noble families, but they don't look more closely or apply it to their fantasy worlds. My history teacher went on a detailed explanation of how men became knights, how the whole gentry system works, and so much more. I could possibly post the entire chart he wrote on the board, but I'll refrain from it. In short, the system was actually more complicated than most writers allow. When they think of Medieval kingdoms, they think of the king, a few noble families, and some peasants, but this is actually different. You have the upper gentry of the knights, those given titles by kings or nobles, the lower gentry of men like yeomens and husbandmen, peasants, the clergy and those associated with the church, paupers, common soldiers, etc... And, not to mention that it was possible for someone to rise up gradually through society, from lower ranks to upper ranks. Society was more complicated and more diverse actually than most Medieval-esque writers admit.
Castles:
Castles are also associated with the Medieval Period. Most of the time, these places are viewed as very grand places to live, but this is far from the truth. Castles were dark, cold (no huge fireplaces or heating systems), dirty, and dreary places. Tapestries didn't show up until later in the Medieval period, and the Crusades later added decorations from the Middle East that made them cheerier and better decorated.
Knights and Chivalry:
Knights and the Code of Chivalry were also big during the Medieval Period. However, knights were not the most honorable or admirable characters. They were required to serve their masters and to go off to war when summoned, but knights were very belligerent and aggressive. They were always looking for fights, and they often helped raid the lands of other nobles. Tournaments were used to let the knights take out their aggression, and the Crusades, no doubt, also helped keep them from going crazy when no wars or battles were going on. Even though knights had a Code of Chivalry, I'm pretty sure they viewed it "more as guidelines than actual rules." So knights were certainly not angelic in the Medieval Period.
There are other areas I'm sure I could touch on, but this is a general look at what the real Medieval world looked like. It was not a clean, proper time period; it was messy, aggressive, and rather unstable. It had a lot of societal complexities which most writers largely ignore in favor of a simpler world. There is only one Medieval-esque writer that I know of who comes even close to capturing the gritty Medieval world, and that would be George R. R. Martin. Martin did a good job of sticking to actual Medieval facts and not stereotypes (though I believe he severely overdid the whole sex aspect that pervades "A Song of Fire and Ice"). Nonetheless, Martin actually did his homework about the Medieval world, and it makes his world of Westeros much more realistic and not a cardboard stereotype.
Here are some examples of how writers need to do more research if they want to do a Medieval-esque world.
Monarchies:
Most Medieval fantasy stories focus on a king who is running the political show. The king is usually very powerful and is from a long dynasty, and he generally has few to no rivals. However, looking at the Medieval period, this is not the case. Kings were actually fairly weak in power, and dynasties were quick to rise and fall. Most kingdoms were actually more under the control of powerful noble families, and sometimes these families could completely take over and start a new royal dynasty. Kings also did not have very much power, as the whole "Divine Right of Kings" and absolutism would not show up for a few more centuries. Kingdoms were also not very stable. Nobles were constantly feuding for the throne, especially if a king was deposed or died without an heir; The War of Roses is a good example of this.
But also, people in the Medieval times were semi-independent, relying on the Feudal System's structure. Nobles managed their estates and those of their vassels, taking taxes from them, and kings interfered very little with this. And, as I said earlier, nobles were really the ones in control, not the kings.
In conclusion, Medieval kings were sometimes powerful, but they were also weak. They were constantly battling the powerful noble families, and kingdoms were thus very unstable because of those political structures.
Social structures:
Another common misconception of the Middle Ages is the entire social structure. People imagine the whole system of peasants/ serfs, knights, the church, and noble families, but they don't look more closely or apply it to their fantasy worlds. My history teacher went on a detailed explanation of how men became knights, how the whole gentry system works, and so much more. I could possibly post the entire chart he wrote on the board, but I'll refrain from it. In short, the system was actually more complicated than most writers allow. When they think of Medieval kingdoms, they think of the king, a few noble families, and some peasants, but this is actually different. You have the upper gentry of the knights, those given titles by kings or nobles, the lower gentry of men like yeomens and husbandmen, peasants, the clergy and those associated with the church, paupers, common soldiers, etc... And, not to mention that it was possible for someone to rise up gradually through society, from lower ranks to upper ranks. Society was more complicated and more diverse actually than most Medieval-esque writers admit.
Castles:
Castles are also associated with the Medieval Period. Most of the time, these places are viewed as very grand places to live, but this is far from the truth. Castles were dark, cold (no huge fireplaces or heating systems), dirty, and dreary places. Tapestries didn't show up until later in the Medieval period, and the Crusades later added decorations from the Middle East that made them cheerier and better decorated.
Knights and Chivalry:
Knights and the Code of Chivalry were also big during the Medieval Period. However, knights were not the most honorable or admirable characters. They were required to serve their masters and to go off to war when summoned, but knights were very belligerent and aggressive. They were always looking for fights, and they often helped raid the lands of other nobles. Tournaments were used to let the knights take out their aggression, and the Crusades, no doubt, also helped keep them from going crazy when no wars or battles were going on. Even though knights had a Code of Chivalry, I'm pretty sure they viewed it "more as guidelines than actual rules." So knights were certainly not angelic in the Medieval Period.
There are other areas I'm sure I could touch on, but this is a general look at what the real Medieval world looked like. It was not a clean, proper time period; it was messy, aggressive, and rather unstable. It had a lot of societal complexities which most writers largely ignore in favor of a simpler world. There is only one Medieval-esque writer that I know of who comes even close to capturing the gritty Medieval world, and that would be George R. R. Martin. Martin did a good job of sticking to actual Medieval facts and not stereotypes (though I believe he severely overdid the whole sex aspect that pervades "A Song of Fire and Ice"). Nonetheless, Martin actually did his homework about the Medieval world, and it makes his world of Westeros much more realistic and not a cardboard stereotype.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Clothing Faux Pas
In stories nowadays, writers do not think about what their characters are wearing nearly often enough. This is particularly laughable in movies or other visual story-telling forms today.
Here are some common costumes that need to be reconsidered seriously.
High heels- in movies nowadays, it isn’t uncommon for the female protagonist to wear heels. This is normally not a problem until a lot of action shows up. In the “Underworld” movie, Selene wear heels as she hunts down werewolves. This is hilarious because clearly the costume designer doesn’t know much about heels. Heels, to me, are uncomfortable and difficult to walk in. They would be impossible to run in or jump around in. So enough about the delusions of women strutting around and kicking butt while they’re wearing heels because it can’t happen.
Capes- people think capes are so cool, and they can be. However, capes are also not realistic. Whenever I think of a villain swishing a cape, I think of “The Incredibles” and Edna’s little thing on capes. It is a hilarious little monologue, but I think it is a pretty accurate look at capes. Long capes, especially if they are swishing around, could get caught in something and slow the character down.
Leather- lately, particularly in more urban or fantasy-esque stories, leather is used to dress the female protagonists so that they look sexy. However, given my knowledge of leather, I would think wearing all-leather clothing would not be very comfortable, especially if your character moves around a lot.
So, when you are thinking up how to dress your protagonist, do give it some consideration. If your character is a hunter or someone who sees a lot of action, then they need to wear clothing that is comfortable and that allows them to move around with getting caught in stuff or having difficulty moving. If your character is going around on a trip in the woods or somewhere in the outdoors, then they need to wear clothing that will be conducive to that trip… unless they are abruptly thrown into the situation without any warning, but even then they should have some ability to alter clothing to fit the situation. So, keep those things in mind as you write.
Here are some common costumes that need to be reconsidered seriously.
High heels- in movies nowadays, it isn’t uncommon for the female protagonist to wear heels. This is normally not a problem until a lot of action shows up. In the “Underworld” movie, Selene wear heels as she hunts down werewolves. This is hilarious because clearly the costume designer doesn’t know much about heels. Heels, to me, are uncomfortable and difficult to walk in. They would be impossible to run in or jump around in. So enough about the delusions of women strutting around and kicking butt while they’re wearing heels because it can’t happen.
Capes- people think capes are so cool, and they can be. However, capes are also not realistic. Whenever I think of a villain swishing a cape, I think of “The Incredibles” and Edna’s little thing on capes. It is a hilarious little monologue, but I think it is a pretty accurate look at capes. Long capes, especially if they are swishing around, could get caught in something and slow the character down.
Leather- lately, particularly in more urban or fantasy-esque stories, leather is used to dress the female protagonists so that they look sexy. However, given my knowledge of leather, I would think wearing all-leather clothing would not be very comfortable, especially if your character moves around a lot.
So, when you are thinking up how to dress your protagonist, do give it some consideration. If your character is a hunter or someone who sees a lot of action, then they need to wear clothing that is comfortable and that allows them to move around with getting caught in stuff or having difficulty moving. If your character is going around on a trip in the woods or somewhere in the outdoors, then they need to wear clothing that will be conducive to that trip… unless they are abruptly thrown into the situation without any warning, but even then they should have some ability to alter clothing to fit the situation. So, keep those things in mind as you write.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Act Your Age
Recently, when I was showing off my recent novel attempt (mentioned in the post below), I got a comment that my eight-year old character sounded too mature for his age. This made me think about some of my own characters and how they have the tendency to act older than they really are. It was a reminder to myself that writers need to be careful when they create characters of a certain age and that they need to keep them realistic.
This character Greg is eight years old. He comes from an impoverished family (think Charles Dickins- era poor) and does have some education, though it would not be a lot because of the area of the city he lives in. He is a good artist for his age, though he still uses crayons and is no Da Vinci by any stretch of the imagination. Thinking about his situation made me think of how he would actually talk. Because of his situation and lack of good education, he would likely not have a wide vocabulary, which eight-year olds generally don't anyway. He wouldn't use big words, and he would probably have bad grammar. He wouldn't be very aware of the grave danger that he's in, but he does have some knowledge of what is right and wrong. This is shown in him drawing a disturbing picture and him freaking out because he doesn't know why he drew it. It will be tricky to make sure Greg is accurate for his age, and I'm thinking of using my seven-year old cousin as a model for age-appropriate behavior.
While I was thinking of how to write Greg more accurately, it made me think of how many other written characters today don't act their ages. I know of one fantasy where a seventeen-year old pair of twins act more like thirteen-year olds (i.e. the whole love-triangle and relationship jealousy, their recklessness, and their general naive behavior), and their peers act the same way too, despite the fact that these young characters are in situations that would require them to be more mature for their age. In Paolini's "Eldest," the elf queen Islanzadi is over a hundred years old, but she acts very foolishly and immaturely, which she herself admits at one point. I've never read the "Twilight" series, but from the movies I've gleaned some information that the Cullen vampires don't act their age; Edward acts like a love-sick teenager even though he's well over a hundred years old, and the other coven members don't give any indication that they have lived for a long time.
Now, there are exceptions to the general rule. Most three-year olds don't have a large vocabulary, but I know of two sisters (not twins) who started talking at a very young age and both of them talk in largely complete sentences that are more advanced for the norm, even though they're both under the age of five. But then I know of a five-year old who doesn't talk very well because her growth has been stunted due to a genetic disorder. There can be exceptions to where a five-year old may talk much better than others his or her own age or act more mature, but you have to offer an explanation for it, whether it be that this child grew up without TV or was well-disciplined from a young age. Another exception, sadly, is college students; most of them whom I've met still act like highschoolers and aren't very mature, though there are a few exceptions.
So, when you start writing down how your character's behavior, keep his or her age in mind. Make sure that they act their age, unless there are very special circumstances like some of the examples given above. This will keep your story realistic and will help define your characters better.
This character Greg is eight years old. He comes from an impoverished family (think Charles Dickins- era poor) and does have some education, though it would not be a lot because of the area of the city he lives in. He is a good artist for his age, though he still uses crayons and is no Da Vinci by any stretch of the imagination. Thinking about his situation made me think of how he would actually talk. Because of his situation and lack of good education, he would likely not have a wide vocabulary, which eight-year olds generally don't anyway. He wouldn't use big words, and he would probably have bad grammar. He wouldn't be very aware of the grave danger that he's in, but he does have some knowledge of what is right and wrong. This is shown in him drawing a disturbing picture and him freaking out because he doesn't know why he drew it. It will be tricky to make sure Greg is accurate for his age, and I'm thinking of using my seven-year old cousin as a model for age-appropriate behavior.
While I was thinking of how to write Greg more accurately, it made me think of how many other written characters today don't act their ages. I know of one fantasy where a seventeen-year old pair of twins act more like thirteen-year olds (i.e. the whole love-triangle and relationship jealousy, their recklessness, and their general naive behavior), and their peers act the same way too, despite the fact that these young characters are in situations that would require them to be more mature for their age. In Paolini's "Eldest," the elf queen Islanzadi is over a hundred years old, but she acts very foolishly and immaturely, which she herself admits at one point. I've never read the "Twilight" series, but from the movies I've gleaned some information that the Cullen vampires don't act their age; Edward acts like a love-sick teenager even though he's well over a hundred years old, and the other coven members don't give any indication that they have lived for a long time.
Now, there are exceptions to the general rule. Most three-year olds don't have a large vocabulary, but I know of two sisters (not twins) who started talking at a very young age and both of them talk in largely complete sentences that are more advanced for the norm, even though they're both under the age of five. But then I know of a five-year old who doesn't talk very well because her growth has been stunted due to a genetic disorder. There can be exceptions to where a five-year old may talk much better than others his or her own age or act more mature, but you have to offer an explanation for it, whether it be that this child grew up without TV or was well-disciplined from a young age. Another exception, sadly, is college students; most of them whom I've met still act like highschoolers and aren't very mature, though there are a few exceptions.
So, when you start writing down how your character's behavior, keep his or her age in mind. Make sure that they act their age, unless there are very special circumstances like some of the examples given above. This will keep your story realistic and will help define your characters better.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Looking for Critics
About a month ago, I finished the first draft of a new novel. Wanting to improve, I've been trying to find some people who can give me honest, constructive criticism. If you are interested, check out the story on figment. I'm only on chapter 16, and I'm adding new chapters as I finish them in the second draft. Constructive criticism is more than welcomed.
http://figment.com/books/130295-War-of-Magic
http://figment.com/books/130295-War-of-Magic
Thursday, September 15, 2011
World Building Fun
I'm a history geek, though I occasionally dabble in other subjects like anthropology or geology, depending on my mood. When I create fantasy-esque stories or those not set in the real world, I really enjoy using those real-life topics to help build new worlds. Right now, I'm in the process of creating a new world that I used in a recently-finished novel of mine.
My story, unlike most others than I write, has a modern-esque, urban setting. I admit that I have little experience with cities, as I rarely visit Atlanta and I try to avoid it when I can. When I visited the northern part of the city last weekend, I took the opportunity to study what I could, looking at the streets, the apartments, and how entire areas were structured. Afterwards, I used google maps to look over the city and then wikipedia to discover the names of the city's different neighborhoods and regions. These things helped me get a better picture of how to structure my urban fantasy city. At some point, I will probably draw a rough map of the city's neighborhoods so that I will be able to track my characters' movements and figure out where certain events take place. Another thing that helped me with my city-building was a book called "Five Points" by Tyler Anbinder, which I read for a history class earlier this year. This book was very informative about that New York City neighborhood during the nineteenth century, and it gave me a detailed look of the poverty and developing culture within that small region; it helped me create the slummy areas of my city where my protagonist and her family live.
But my world-building can't just stop at the city, though it will become less detailed. Because my city is set on an island, I do a bit of wikipedia research on islands to see which one(s) may be the most like the island in my story. I may add a bit more details on the island because the story ends outside of the city (where 99% of the story takes place), and so I'll need to know more about what lies outside that area. I'm also doing a bit of history about the island at the moment so that I know a little more about it and perhaps find some more relevant facts needed in the story.
Because my island is run by an empire, next I will do some sparse world-building on the empire. It will not be in much detail, as I will focus more on the political, historical, economical, and social factors that could contribute to the specific city and to the story's plot. If I choose to go into more detail, then that information is more for my own geekiness and is unlikely to be divulged in the course of the story or anywhere else.
Not everyone has the same interests as myself, but I do believe that writers who do world-building for new worlds should try to get as in-depth in it as they can. This detail will help you keep your world's background details consistent, and it will make it seem more realistic. I'm reminded of George R.R. Martin's world in "Song of Fire and Ice," where he goes into great details about the cultures, origins of certain peoples, etc... and he does it well, even if some of the details aren't directly related to the plot.
My story, unlike most others than I write, has a modern-esque, urban setting. I admit that I have little experience with cities, as I rarely visit Atlanta and I try to avoid it when I can. When I visited the northern part of the city last weekend, I took the opportunity to study what I could, looking at the streets, the apartments, and how entire areas were structured. Afterwards, I used google maps to look over the city and then wikipedia to discover the names of the city's different neighborhoods and regions. These things helped me get a better picture of how to structure my urban fantasy city. At some point, I will probably draw a rough map of the city's neighborhoods so that I will be able to track my characters' movements and figure out where certain events take place. Another thing that helped me with my city-building was a book called "Five Points" by Tyler Anbinder, which I read for a history class earlier this year. This book was very informative about that New York City neighborhood during the nineteenth century, and it gave me a detailed look of the poverty and developing culture within that small region; it helped me create the slummy areas of my city where my protagonist and her family live.
But my world-building can't just stop at the city, though it will become less detailed. Because my city is set on an island, I do a bit of wikipedia research on islands to see which one(s) may be the most like the island in my story. I may add a bit more details on the island because the story ends outside of the city (where 99% of the story takes place), and so I'll need to know more about what lies outside that area. I'm also doing a bit of history about the island at the moment so that I know a little more about it and perhaps find some more relevant facts needed in the story.
Because my island is run by an empire, next I will do some sparse world-building on the empire. It will not be in much detail, as I will focus more on the political, historical, economical, and social factors that could contribute to the specific city and to the story's plot. If I choose to go into more detail, then that information is more for my own geekiness and is unlikely to be divulged in the course of the story or anywhere else.
Not everyone has the same interests as myself, but I do believe that writers who do world-building for new worlds should try to get as in-depth in it as they can. This detail will help you keep your world's background details consistent, and it will make it seem more realistic. I'm reminded of George R.R. Martin's world in "Song of Fire and Ice," where he goes into great details about the cultures, origins of certain peoples, etc... and he does it well, even if some of the details aren't directly related to the plot.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Family Woes
Every story has some aspect or focus on one's family. Even if it's a background issue that is merely there to define a character or give them a back story, every story is about a family. However, recently in writing there have been various issues with families that have become overdone or are just plain unrealistic.
Brother- sister love
People often talk about the special bond between twin siblings that is different from that between normal siblings. However, this has become very twisted in recent literature in the form of incest or at least borderline incestuous relationships between a male and a female twin. George R.R. Martin has used this in "A Song of Fire and Ice" with Jamie Lannister fathering his twin sister Cersei's children; it's also shown up in the various ruling houses having marriage between a brother and a sister and then again in an implied abusive relationship between Viserys and Daenerys. But this is also showing up in other forms of literature. In one fantasy story I know, a seventeen year-old twin brother and sister share a bedroom (which I later discovered is actually illegal) and have a borderline incestuous relationship with each other. In the movie adaptation of Frank Herbert's "Children of Dune," the screenwriters created an implied incestuous relationship between the twins Leto and Ghanima which I do not recall being in the original novel (though admittedly it has been a while since I read the book). In one of the Dirk Pitt novels (the exact name escapes me at the moment), Dirk's twin kids Dirk Jr. and Summer have a few awkward moments that could imply some form of incest between the two.
Now, granted, twins do have a special bond, but I seriously doubt that it is incestuous. To avoid unintentional incest between the twins, do some actual research on fraternal twins and their bonds. Or, watch how other siblings interact and use that in your writing. Whatever the case, be careful when writing about siblings, especially those who are twins.
"Luke, I am your father"
A common thing that has happened in all forms of literature and has become popular to the point of being overused is someone discovering that their parentage is not what they originally thought. This is in more literary pieces than I could count, but TV Tropes.com has an extensive list of them. This has been overdone, but what really bothers me is generally how the character reacts to this realization. Like what happened in "Star Wars," these children are shocked by the revelation but then suddenly form a bond to this parent who has not been there for them. While I imagine that there might be some desire for the two to reconcile (depending on the situation), this is not entirely realistic. I know of a guy who was adopted when he was too young to remember but when he figured it out, he had no desire to know about his real father, as he considers his adopted father to be his only real one.
I am against using this story trope in writing because it has been overused to the point of being cliche.
Just One Night
Another story trope that has been overused and is also unrealistic is when a woman gets pregnant after a one-night stand. This is seen in the "Phantom of the Opera" sequel where Christine and the Phantom have a romantic encounter shortly before her wedding, and she gets pregnant as a result of it; the sequel to "Gone with the Wind" also has a similar situation. The "Count of Monte Christo" movie has Mercedes getting pregnant by Dantes after they have sex, and the movie "August Rush" has the protagonist being conceived during a one-night stand. Granted it does happen in real life, but this has been used way too many times in stories. It would seem more believable if the relationship has gone on for longer and if there has been more than one sexual encounter between the couple.
Torn families
Given high divorce rates in our modern society and the number of single parents raising their children, it is no surprise that in modern literature it is extremely hard to find stories where children have both parents and where there is no divorce in the family. In stories where the parents are divorced, I've noticed that generally the children tend to dislike their step-parent (including any step-siblings) or that the step-parent is not a likable character (or is evil). In a few cases, the divorce is amicable and the torn family still tends to get along, but this is not common. Even in stories where there is no divorce, I have seen tension-filled families where one of the parents is a jerk but the other one won't divorce him (or her), or where the kids may be abused or generally ignored.
All of the following have become very overused in story-writing, and some of them are plain unrealistic but occur commonly anyway. I would suggest staying away from these story tropes or at least reworking them in such a way that it becomes original; this will keep your story realistic and unique without you becoming cliched.
Brother- sister love
People often talk about the special bond between twin siblings that is different from that between normal siblings. However, this has become very twisted in recent literature in the form of incest or at least borderline incestuous relationships between a male and a female twin. George R.R. Martin has used this in "A Song of Fire and Ice" with Jamie Lannister fathering his twin sister Cersei's children; it's also shown up in the various ruling houses having marriage between a brother and a sister and then again in an implied abusive relationship between Viserys and Daenerys. But this is also showing up in other forms of literature. In one fantasy story I know, a seventeen year-old twin brother and sister share a bedroom (which I later discovered is actually illegal) and have a borderline incestuous relationship with each other. In the movie adaptation of Frank Herbert's "Children of Dune," the screenwriters created an implied incestuous relationship between the twins Leto and Ghanima which I do not recall being in the original novel (though admittedly it has been a while since I read the book). In one of the Dirk Pitt novels (the exact name escapes me at the moment), Dirk's twin kids Dirk Jr. and Summer have a few awkward moments that could imply some form of incest between the two.
Now, granted, twins do have a special bond, but I seriously doubt that it is incestuous. To avoid unintentional incest between the twins, do some actual research on fraternal twins and their bonds. Or, watch how other siblings interact and use that in your writing. Whatever the case, be careful when writing about siblings, especially those who are twins.
"Luke, I am your father"
A common thing that has happened in all forms of literature and has become popular to the point of being overused is someone discovering that their parentage is not what they originally thought. This is in more literary pieces than I could count, but TV Tropes.com has an extensive list of them. This has been overdone, but what really bothers me is generally how the character reacts to this realization. Like what happened in "Star Wars," these children are shocked by the revelation but then suddenly form a bond to this parent who has not been there for them. While I imagine that there might be some desire for the two to reconcile (depending on the situation), this is not entirely realistic. I know of a guy who was adopted when he was too young to remember but when he figured it out, he had no desire to know about his real father, as he considers his adopted father to be his only real one.
I am against using this story trope in writing because it has been overused to the point of being cliche.
Just One Night
Another story trope that has been overused and is also unrealistic is when a woman gets pregnant after a one-night stand. This is seen in the "Phantom of the Opera" sequel where Christine and the Phantom have a romantic encounter shortly before her wedding, and she gets pregnant as a result of it; the sequel to "Gone with the Wind" also has a similar situation. The "Count of Monte Christo" movie has Mercedes getting pregnant by Dantes after they have sex, and the movie "August Rush" has the protagonist being conceived during a one-night stand. Granted it does happen in real life, but this has been used way too many times in stories. It would seem more believable if the relationship has gone on for longer and if there has been more than one sexual encounter between the couple.
Torn families
Given high divorce rates in our modern society and the number of single parents raising their children, it is no surprise that in modern literature it is extremely hard to find stories where children have both parents and where there is no divorce in the family. In stories where the parents are divorced, I've noticed that generally the children tend to dislike their step-parent (including any step-siblings) or that the step-parent is not a likable character (or is evil). In a few cases, the divorce is amicable and the torn family still tends to get along, but this is not common. Even in stories where there is no divorce, I have seen tension-filled families where one of the parents is a jerk but the other one won't divorce him (or her), or where the kids may be abused or generally ignored.
All of the following have become very overused in story-writing, and some of them are plain unrealistic but occur commonly anyway. I would suggest staying away from these story tropes or at least reworking them in such a way that it becomes original; this will keep your story realistic and unique without you becoming cliched.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Uneven Partnerships
Some stories focus on two people who function as a duo and are important because of it. However, writers sadly often make these partnerships very uneven so that it's most of the focus placed on one person.
In some stories, the duo is meant to be important together but one of the members is held up as the most important while the other is more of a background character. In one fantasy story I've read, a twin brother and sister are supposed to save the world, but the boy ends up becoming the most important character while his sister is forgotten and left in the background as a minor character. This uneven partnership can also be shown in personalities. In most adaptations of "Sherlock Holmes," Watson is generally portrayed as the bumbling oaf who more or less tags along while Holmes is the real star of the show. Lately, in stories dealing with partners, there is the unfortunate tendency to make one partner really smart and the other really stupid.
While uneven partnership is not necessarily a bad thing, here are some suggestions on how to improve on it. Firstly, if you're going to elevate one of the two above the other, then at least give the lower one some dignity; make him more of a helper, whose talents compliment the more important one. This would make the lower one also important, even if he or she is not destined to do all the great things. Secondly, give the partners personalities and talents so that they compliment each other. For example, one partner is the physically stronger of the two but the other has more brains.
Here are a few examples of my favorite partners seen in stories (not just literature) today:
-Guy Ritchie's movie "Sherlock Holmes." I really enjoyed how the partnership between Holmes and Watson worked. Holmes was definitely the genius of the two, but he was also eccentric and had his head way out in space a good portion of the time. Watson was the more rational person who tried to keep his friend down on earth, but he was not a glorified babysitter.
-Clive Cussler's "Dirk Pitt" novels. I've only read two of the novels, but I enjoy the interactions between Dirk and Al. The two have been best friends, and this clearly shows in their humor and how they bounce off of each other. Dirk is definitely the head of the duo, but Al is important too; without his friend, Dirk would be nothing.
-The TV show "Law and Order: SVU." One reason (among others) why I really enjoy watching SVU is the partnership between Stabler and Benson. Even though they are a male-female partnership, the two share a very close platonic relationship that has no romance at all. Stabler and Benson both get emotional and angry over different cases, and sometimes they even clash on their viewpoints. However, their differences in beliefs and personalities only strengthen their relationship and make their partnership work.
-Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings." One thing that the movie adaptations really messed up with was Frodo and Sam's relationship. In the book, Frodo is treated as the more important of the duo because of his aristocratic rank (in hobbit sense) and because he carries the One Ring, and Sam is merely his servant who accompanies him. Sam is very devoted to Frodo and looks after him, but he proves his own worth elsewhere, like when he fights off Shelob, rescues Frodo from Cirith Ungol, and carries him up Mount Doom. Despite their differences in social rankings, the two share a strong platonic relationship that makes it possible for them to complete the dangerous quest to destroy the Ring.
Partnerships can be even or uneven, like they are in real life, but they function the best when the two compliment each other in more ways than one, whether it be their different perspectives, personalities, or talents, and even if one of the two is meant to more important than the other.
In some stories, the duo is meant to be important together but one of the members is held up as the most important while the other is more of a background character. In one fantasy story I've read, a twin brother and sister are supposed to save the world, but the boy ends up becoming the most important character while his sister is forgotten and left in the background as a minor character. This uneven partnership can also be shown in personalities. In most adaptations of "Sherlock Holmes," Watson is generally portrayed as the bumbling oaf who more or less tags along while Holmes is the real star of the show. Lately, in stories dealing with partners, there is the unfortunate tendency to make one partner really smart and the other really stupid.
While uneven partnership is not necessarily a bad thing, here are some suggestions on how to improve on it. Firstly, if you're going to elevate one of the two above the other, then at least give the lower one some dignity; make him more of a helper, whose talents compliment the more important one. This would make the lower one also important, even if he or she is not destined to do all the great things. Secondly, give the partners personalities and talents so that they compliment each other. For example, one partner is the physically stronger of the two but the other has more brains.
Here are a few examples of my favorite partners seen in stories (not just literature) today:
-Guy Ritchie's movie "Sherlock Holmes." I really enjoyed how the partnership between Holmes and Watson worked. Holmes was definitely the genius of the two, but he was also eccentric and had his head way out in space a good portion of the time. Watson was the more rational person who tried to keep his friend down on earth, but he was not a glorified babysitter.
-Clive Cussler's "Dirk Pitt" novels. I've only read two of the novels, but I enjoy the interactions between Dirk and Al. The two have been best friends, and this clearly shows in their humor and how they bounce off of each other. Dirk is definitely the head of the duo, but Al is important too; without his friend, Dirk would be nothing.
-The TV show "Law and Order: SVU." One reason (among others) why I really enjoy watching SVU is the partnership between Stabler and Benson. Even though they are a male-female partnership, the two share a very close platonic relationship that has no romance at all. Stabler and Benson both get emotional and angry over different cases, and sometimes they even clash on their viewpoints. However, their differences in beliefs and personalities only strengthen their relationship and make their partnership work.
-Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings." One thing that the movie adaptations really messed up with was Frodo and Sam's relationship. In the book, Frodo is treated as the more important of the duo because of his aristocratic rank (in hobbit sense) and because he carries the One Ring, and Sam is merely his servant who accompanies him. Sam is very devoted to Frodo and looks after him, but he proves his own worth elsewhere, like when he fights off Shelob, rescues Frodo from Cirith Ungol, and carries him up Mount Doom. Despite their differences in social rankings, the two share a strong platonic relationship that makes it possible for them to complete the dangerous quest to destroy the Ring.
Partnerships can be even or uneven, like they are in real life, but they function the best when the two compliment each other in more ways than one, whether it be their different perspectives, personalities, or talents, and even if one of the two is meant to more important than the other.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Grow Up...
Another thing that bothers me in reading a lot of historical, epic, or fantasy stories nowadays is that the protagonists are teenagers. Now, there is nothing wrong with that, but it has become a very serious problem in literature. I've seen stories where kids ranging between the ages of fifteen and seventeen are completely immature and then are forced to grow up when they find themselves thrown into a particular situation. This is another history-inspired post, so just bear with me here.
The reason I have a problem with most teenagers in stories today is that, if they're in a historically-based or fantasy story, then they tend to be very immature and unlikable. This would not be true in history. Think about it. In historical times, girls were often married off as young as the age of twelve or thirteen. But, when they got married, they were not unsure what they were doing. These girls were mature, generally well-educated, and were trained to run a household at a young age. They were constantly busy and had absolutely no time to angst or complain about growing up too fast or too slow. This is especially true if your protagonist is a male and is an orphan or only one parent; he would have to grow up faster to take on a man's responsibilities to take care of the family. Teenagers would also have to grow up rapidly if they were poorer because they had to work hard to help support the family, like if they live on a farm. In other words, back then children had a very short transition period from child to adult, and that was the accepted norm.
Case in point: John Quincy Adams. The sixth president of the US and son of John Adams was only eleven when he accompanied his father overseas. He spent most of his teen years traveling all over Europe, including serving as a secretary to an American envoy to Russia when he was no more than thirteen or fourteen. By the time he was twenty years old, Adams had quite a career already under his belt, and so he had little difficulty in becoming a lawyer and later a foreign minister, all before the age of thirty. Not all children had the same opportunities as Adams, but they nonetheless became adults very early in life. This made them far more mature than most teenagers today, and this means that some literature focused on teenagers and young adults is inaccurate.
If you're writing a story set in modern times or after the 1950's, then you can largely ignore this post. But, if your story is a fantasy or historical, I think you should consider that not every teenager back then acted like teens do today. Instead, young people in the past were far more mature and capable than they are portrayed in literature today.
The reason I have a problem with most teenagers in stories today is that, if they're in a historically-based or fantasy story, then they tend to be very immature and unlikable. This would not be true in history. Think about it. In historical times, girls were often married off as young as the age of twelve or thirteen. But, when they got married, they were not unsure what they were doing. These girls were mature, generally well-educated, and were trained to run a household at a young age. They were constantly busy and had absolutely no time to angst or complain about growing up too fast or too slow. This is especially true if your protagonist is a male and is an orphan or only one parent; he would have to grow up faster to take on a man's responsibilities to take care of the family. Teenagers would also have to grow up rapidly if they were poorer because they had to work hard to help support the family, like if they live on a farm. In other words, back then children had a very short transition period from child to adult, and that was the accepted norm.
Case in point: John Quincy Adams. The sixth president of the US and son of John Adams was only eleven when he accompanied his father overseas. He spent most of his teen years traveling all over Europe, including serving as a secretary to an American envoy to Russia when he was no more than thirteen or fourteen. By the time he was twenty years old, Adams had quite a career already under his belt, and so he had little difficulty in becoming a lawyer and later a foreign minister, all before the age of thirty. Not all children had the same opportunities as Adams, but they nonetheless became adults very early in life. This made them far more mature than most teenagers today, and this means that some literature focused on teenagers and young adults is inaccurate.
If you're writing a story set in modern times or after the 1950's, then you can largely ignore this post. But, if your story is a fantasy or historical, I think you should consider that not every teenager back then acted like teens do today. Instead, young people in the past were far more mature and capable than they are portrayed in literature today.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Arranged Marriages
I've always been something of a history geek, and this hasn't changed over the years. When I was younger, I had a great fascination with English royalty, evidenced by a book that detailed the lives and reigns of every king and queen from Alfred the Great to Elizabeth II.
A particular theme that I've noticed in literature, whether it be published or not, is that there is frequently an arranged marriage involved somehow. Generally, it happens to the girls of the story who also happen to be princesses or from a high-rank family. The parents try to encourage the girl to marry a certain man of great wealth or rank, and then she screams and refuses to do it, which leads her to run away, become the heroine, and then find true love with a man of a lower rank.
While this is all well and good, my historical research over the years, especially in regards to European royalty has led me to question whether or not this is an entirely accurate picture. I'm certain there were people who did not want to marry a complete stranger all for the sake of the family's honor and rank, and I'm sure that some arranged marriages were truly miserable. However, that being said, some arranged marriages actually produced true love, even if it wasn't under ideal circumstances. I'll give you a few historical examples.
- Edward I of England (if you've seen the movie "Braveheart," he was the wicked English king). In real life, Edward arranged to be married to a Spanish princess called Eleanor. The two had never met before, but the two deeply fell in love and were very attached to each other for many years (as evidenced by a legend that Eleanor sucked the poison out of one of her husband's wounds during the Crusades). After Eleanor died, Edward erected crosses all over England in her honor.
- Henry VII of England (the father of the infamous Henry VIII). He married Elizabeth of York solely for political reasons so that he could hold the throne, as the entire country had been undergoing the War of Roses for years. Even if they weren't in love, they were still very attached to one another throughout their lives.
-Charles I of England (the one beheaded by the Puritans in 1649). Charles arranged to marry the Catholic French princess Henrietta Maria, and the two had a very difficult first few years. However, they eventually warmed up to each other and fell in love, becoming very attached to one another.
- William and Mary of Orange. When the British Mary learned that she was arranged to marry her Dutch cousin William, she cried for several hours. However, the two became very close to one another over the course of their marriage.
- George III (the king during the American Revolution). He met his wife Charlotte for the first time on their wedding day, and they likely married only because George was desperate to find a wife. However, they were a truly happy couple, as evidenced by the fact they had fifteen children and that George never took a mistress like many men of his rank did at the time.
There are more historical examples, but generally in history arranged marriages were not completely miserable affairs. Some people, like Mary, did not want to go into them, but they ended up being happy with their new spouse. But, then again, men and women back then didn't have issues of angst like many people today do; they may not have liked what they were doing, but they did their required duty for the sake of something greater than their own feelings.
So, next time you think of writing how someone runs away from home to avoid an arranged marriage, think about this post.
A particular theme that I've noticed in literature, whether it be published or not, is that there is frequently an arranged marriage involved somehow. Generally, it happens to the girls of the story who also happen to be princesses or from a high-rank family. The parents try to encourage the girl to marry a certain man of great wealth or rank, and then she screams and refuses to do it, which leads her to run away, become the heroine, and then find true love with a man of a lower rank.
While this is all well and good, my historical research over the years, especially in regards to European royalty has led me to question whether or not this is an entirely accurate picture. I'm certain there were people who did not want to marry a complete stranger all for the sake of the family's honor and rank, and I'm sure that some arranged marriages were truly miserable. However, that being said, some arranged marriages actually produced true love, even if it wasn't under ideal circumstances. I'll give you a few historical examples.
- Edward I of England (if you've seen the movie "Braveheart," he was the wicked English king). In real life, Edward arranged to be married to a Spanish princess called Eleanor. The two had never met before, but the two deeply fell in love and were very attached to each other for many years (as evidenced by a legend that Eleanor sucked the poison out of one of her husband's wounds during the Crusades). After Eleanor died, Edward erected crosses all over England in her honor.
- Henry VII of England (the father of the infamous Henry VIII). He married Elizabeth of York solely for political reasons so that he could hold the throne, as the entire country had been undergoing the War of Roses for years. Even if they weren't in love, they were still very attached to one another throughout their lives.
-Charles I of England (the one beheaded by the Puritans in 1649). Charles arranged to marry the Catholic French princess Henrietta Maria, and the two had a very difficult first few years. However, they eventually warmed up to each other and fell in love, becoming very attached to one another.
- William and Mary of Orange. When the British Mary learned that she was arranged to marry her Dutch cousin William, she cried for several hours. However, the two became very close to one another over the course of their marriage.
- George III (the king during the American Revolution). He met his wife Charlotte for the first time on their wedding day, and they likely married only because George was desperate to find a wife. However, they were a truly happy couple, as evidenced by the fact they had fifteen children and that George never took a mistress like many men of his rank did at the time.
There are more historical examples, but generally in history arranged marriages were not completely miserable affairs. Some people, like Mary, did not want to go into them, but they ended up being happy with their new spouse. But, then again, men and women back then didn't have issues of angst like many people today do; they may not have liked what they were doing, but they did their required duty for the sake of something greater than their own feelings.
So, next time you think of writing how someone runs away from home to avoid an arranged marriage, think about this post.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Another Writing Blogger
An on-line friend of mine has started up his own wordpress, where he has been posting about writing. I've thoroughly enjoyed reading it. He's a good writer and brings up some excellent points that have gotten me thinking more about writing. Enjoy!
http://4lackofbetterwords.wordpress.com/
http://4lackofbetterwords.wordpress.com/
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Meeting Your Characters
When I sit down to write a story, admittedly one of the hardest things I have to deal with is my characters. I personally find it difficult to give each character a voice or, in other words, to make them sound different from the others. Some are easier than others, like if I have a belligerent character or if I have one who is very sarcastic. Not only that, but it's difficult to make characters consistent, to make sure that they say and do things that aren't out of character for them; an example would be like making sure that a character who has a tendency to panic doesn't suddenly act calm when a situation goes bad or before a big event takes place.
This week, I went camping with my large, crazy family. When we weren't hiking, sitting around the campfire talking, or swimming in the lake, I began working on developing some important characters in my urban fantasy novel. I used the form on the following website:
http://www.elfwood.com/farp/thewriting/crissychar/crissychar.html
Even though the form seems more geared towards fantasy, it actually works for any genre. It asks pretty detailed questions about your characters, stuff like their relationship with their family, what their soft spots are, and how they perceive themselves.
I've found the form to be very helpful, as it as aided me in finding my characters' motives and what separates them from the others. In short, it helps me understand them better and give me a better picture of what they act and look like. If you're having trouble developing your characters, I suggest you give this form a shot.
This week, I went camping with my large, crazy family. When we weren't hiking, sitting around the campfire talking, or swimming in the lake, I began working on developing some important characters in my urban fantasy novel. I used the form on the following website:
http://www.elfwood.com/farp/thewriting/crissychar/crissychar.html
Even though the form seems more geared towards fantasy, it actually works for any genre. It asks pretty detailed questions about your characters, stuff like their relationship with their family, what their soft spots are, and how they perceive themselves.
I've found the form to be very helpful, as it as aided me in finding my characters' motives and what separates them from the others. In short, it helps me understand them better and give me a better picture of what they act and look like. If you're having trouble developing your characters, I suggest you give this form a shot.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Starting a Work
About four years ago this week (or next week, I don't have a precise date) I was goofing off with my new laptop and thinking of a new fantasy story to write. I didn't have anything particular in mind when I opened the chapter with a description of a forest at night, but the story drew me in and I went on, not knowing exactly what I was doing. About a month or two later, I had completed a first draft of a fantasy story, a story that has stuck with me for four whirlwind years.
Each writer varies, but at least each one has some form of a plan when they sit down to write the next literary masterpiece. Some people like to plan down to the tiny details of the plot, the characters, and whatnot, and some people just like to dive in. There's no one right way to plan a work in preparation for writing, as each writer is different, but I'll share what I often do.
For me personally, I discover that if I do minimum planning, then my story has a greater chance of surviving until the very end. It's what happened with my fantasy work-in-progress, and it's also what happened with my 2010 Nanowrimo story and with the urban fantasy/ superhero story that I started a few weeks ago. In the case of my 4 year WIP, I was trying to rewrite a previous fantasy story (which had taken over twenty forms in the period of five years); I started off thinking of one of the forms, but I unexpectedly deviated into a different form that became unique from the original failed idea. In that case, I knew who and what the protagonist knew, but I had absolutely no idea of what was going on in his world or what the plot would be. Without really thinking, I just wrote, and the details came to me. I discovered that he was a military captain, the son of a deposed king, and that his homeland was being conquered by a foreign people. The same thing happened when I did my most recent nanowrimo. I knew it would be a murder-mystery, and I had a few ideas for scenes in my head, but I did minimal planning for it, outside of drastically altering the beginning of the story, which I had previously written. Much to my surprise, the story just developed itself, and I reached my 50 K goal early.
I can't explain why my creative part functions better without details, but when I start, I try to keep such things to a minimum. I may have a few scenes and probably the ending in mind, and I occasionally may define one aspect of a character's personality (for example, for nanowrimo 2010, I knew that my protagonist would be a sarcastic skeptic, but I knew nothing else about what she was like). Otherwise, I largely dive into a story blind and let it develop on its own. I personally find that characters, their back stories, and sometimes even the plot just appear on their own without me doing any extensive planning. Besides, I think it also helps me to have a bare skeleton, which allows me to add and alter details much later, filling up the story over time.
But, as I said, not everyone can function that way. We all plan and begin our stories in different ways. But, ultimately it's not how we begin writing a story; what matters is how we complete it, what our finished product looks like.
Each writer varies, but at least each one has some form of a plan when they sit down to write the next literary masterpiece. Some people like to plan down to the tiny details of the plot, the characters, and whatnot, and some people just like to dive in. There's no one right way to plan a work in preparation for writing, as each writer is different, but I'll share what I often do.
For me personally, I discover that if I do minimum planning, then my story has a greater chance of surviving until the very end. It's what happened with my fantasy work-in-progress, and it's also what happened with my 2010 Nanowrimo story and with the urban fantasy/ superhero story that I started a few weeks ago. In the case of my 4 year WIP, I was trying to rewrite a previous fantasy story (which had taken over twenty forms in the period of five years); I started off thinking of one of the forms, but I unexpectedly deviated into a different form that became unique from the original failed idea. In that case, I knew who and what the protagonist knew, but I had absolutely no idea of what was going on in his world or what the plot would be. Without really thinking, I just wrote, and the details came to me. I discovered that he was a military captain, the son of a deposed king, and that his homeland was being conquered by a foreign people. The same thing happened when I did my most recent nanowrimo. I knew it would be a murder-mystery, and I had a few ideas for scenes in my head, but I did minimal planning for it, outside of drastically altering the beginning of the story, which I had previously written. Much to my surprise, the story just developed itself, and I reached my 50 K goal early.
I can't explain why my creative part functions better without details, but when I start, I try to keep such things to a minimum. I may have a few scenes and probably the ending in mind, and I occasionally may define one aspect of a character's personality (for example, for nanowrimo 2010, I knew that my protagonist would be a sarcastic skeptic, but I knew nothing else about what she was like). Otherwise, I largely dive into a story blind and let it develop on its own. I personally find that characters, their back stories, and sometimes even the plot just appear on their own without me doing any extensive planning. Besides, I think it also helps me to have a bare skeleton, which allows me to add and alter details much later, filling up the story over time.
But, as I said, not everyone can function that way. We all plan and begin our stories in different ways. But, ultimately it's not how we begin writing a story; what matters is how we complete it, what our finished product looks like.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Basic Work
Today, I was sitting in my Advanced Composition class when the teacher returned graded essays to the students. This sparked an interesting discussion about grammatical and spelling errors. Despite this class being a 3000-level for a few sophomores, juniors, and seniors, the teacher was a bit irritated that people still make mistakes with comma splices, spelling, fragment sentences, and other errors more common in middle schoolers than college students.
It got me thinking about grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Even though writing stories is largely about creating a story, the writing style is just as important as maintaining a plot and characters. You could have an amazing and unique story concept that could be the next greatest piece of literature, but if you have horrible spelling or grammar problems, they will spell problems for you. I once looked over a story for an acquaintance, and the grammar and spelling errors were so glaring that I was more focused on them then on what was going on in the story. Granted, we all have problems in certain areas (I admit that mine is spelling sometimes), and that means we just need to work more on those issues.
Here are a few tips I would recommend for working to improve problem areas in basic writing.
1) If you have spelling problems, do not be afraid to use a dictionary. I myself like using Microsoft Word to correct spelling issues, but use what suits you best and what is the most reliable.
2) For grammar and punctuation, I've found Williams' "Style" to be helpful, even though I personally think some of the rules are a bit odd and should not be used.
3) For further grammatical issues, either take a closer glance at your English textbook. Or, don't be afraid to look up the rules on the internet from an official source if you are still confused.
4) Don't be afraid to ask for help from someone you know has a better grasp of grammar, punctuation, or spelling. Whether it be a parent, a friend with mad spelling skills, or someone much wiser than you, ask for help. There's absolutely nothing wrong with asking for help, and in the end it'll be much more beneficial to you than just ignoring the rules or making them up as you go along. Besides, it is also helpful to have someone look over your writing, as they may catch grammatical or spelling mistakes that you've missed.
Those are just some tips, but everyone functions differently. Nonetheless, it is important that all writers have a grasp of proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation because, in the end, those things make you look more professional and more like you know what you are doing. It is a sign that you take your writing seriously, which is always a plus if you want to publish your work or to take your mad writing skills to the next level.
It got me thinking about grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Even though writing stories is largely about creating a story, the writing style is just as important as maintaining a plot and characters. You could have an amazing and unique story concept that could be the next greatest piece of literature, but if you have horrible spelling or grammar problems, they will spell problems for you. I once looked over a story for an acquaintance, and the grammar and spelling errors were so glaring that I was more focused on them then on what was going on in the story. Granted, we all have problems in certain areas (I admit that mine is spelling sometimes), and that means we just need to work more on those issues.
Here are a few tips I would recommend for working to improve problem areas in basic writing.
1) If you have spelling problems, do not be afraid to use a dictionary. I myself like using Microsoft Word to correct spelling issues, but use what suits you best and what is the most reliable.
2) For grammar and punctuation, I've found Williams' "Style" to be helpful, even though I personally think some of the rules are a bit odd and should not be used.
3) For further grammatical issues, either take a closer glance at your English textbook. Or, don't be afraid to look up the rules on the internet from an official source if you are still confused.
4) Don't be afraid to ask for help from someone you know has a better grasp of grammar, punctuation, or spelling. Whether it be a parent, a friend with mad spelling skills, or someone much wiser than you, ask for help. There's absolutely nothing wrong with asking for help, and in the end it'll be much more beneficial to you than just ignoring the rules or making them up as you go along. Besides, it is also helpful to have someone look over your writing, as they may catch grammatical or spelling mistakes that you've missed.
Those are just some tips, but everyone functions differently. Nonetheless, it is important that all writers have a grasp of proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation because, in the end, those things make you look more professional and more like you know what you are doing. It is a sign that you take your writing seriously, which is always a plus if you want to publish your work or to take your mad writing skills to the next level.
Sunday, March 27, 2011
A Bit of Research
At the moment and on a very sporadic basis, I'm trying to help a young teenager with story set sometime during the Middle Ages. Even though we've barely gotten past the first chapter and we have very little communication for various reasons, it got me thinking about historical fiction or fiction set in the real world.
Because of the communication issue, I've yet to bring this up with the girl I'm helping, but there is one thing that I'd like to tell her. She started her historical fiction with a basic story with a basic enemy but no clear indication of the story's setting or anything of the sort. The problem is that she should have done some research on the issue first because, depending on the year and location, it may have a huge impact on the story.
The Middle Ages are commonly used in fantasy and in other genras, and it has, to me, been overdone. However, part of the problem is that the Medieval worlds people create for their stories are not well-researched and come across as very flat. Most commonly think of that time in history as having kinds, knights, lords, the prominent church, and chivalrous acts, but they do not stop to look into that period of time more deeply. They often neglect looking into things like the following: what was housing like back in those days, how was society organized, what were towns and cities like, and other detailed glances. This will help your story seem more realistic, which is a good thing in regards to historical fiction.
Another thing for any form of a historical story is to get a detailed look at the history for the time period. The Middle Ages, depending on what year the story's based in, was a very tempestuous period with frequent wars and tensions between countries. In the early years, you have the Vikings running around all over Europe and wrecking havoc there; then you have wars between England and France; and then you have different invasions such as the Normans invading the British isles and taking over. Things like those need to be taken into consideration because it will help define the world that your story is set in and may also help you create a plot for the story.
So, in conclusion, if you are setting your story in the real world in any time period, do some fairly extensive research for that time. It will help your story seem more accurate, and it should help prevent you from creating a story that seems too modern.
Because of the communication issue, I've yet to bring this up with the girl I'm helping, but there is one thing that I'd like to tell her. She started her historical fiction with a basic story with a basic enemy but no clear indication of the story's setting or anything of the sort. The problem is that she should have done some research on the issue first because, depending on the year and location, it may have a huge impact on the story.
The Middle Ages are commonly used in fantasy and in other genras, and it has, to me, been overdone. However, part of the problem is that the Medieval worlds people create for their stories are not well-researched and come across as very flat. Most commonly think of that time in history as having kinds, knights, lords, the prominent church, and chivalrous acts, but they do not stop to look into that period of time more deeply. They often neglect looking into things like the following: what was housing like back in those days, how was society organized, what were towns and cities like, and other detailed glances. This will help your story seem more realistic, which is a good thing in regards to historical fiction.
Another thing for any form of a historical story is to get a detailed look at the history for the time period. The Middle Ages, depending on what year the story's based in, was a very tempestuous period with frequent wars and tensions between countries. In the early years, you have the Vikings running around all over Europe and wrecking havoc there; then you have wars between England and France; and then you have different invasions such as the Normans invading the British isles and taking over. Things like those need to be taken into consideration because it will help define the world that your story is set in and may also help you create a plot for the story.
So, in conclusion, if you are setting your story in the real world in any time period, do some fairly extensive research for that time. It will help your story seem more accurate, and it should help prevent you from creating a story that seems too modern.
Friday, March 11, 2011
More on Mary Sues
I follow the livejournal anti-shur'tugal, which I enjoy because it often makes me think of writing topics and of ways to improve my own writing. Someone on a forum I frequent posted the following article about Mary Sues and what they really look like; the author verbalizes the issue better than I did, so I suggest you take a look at it.
http://anti-shurtugal.andontie.net/2010/08/14/ironwings-mary-sue-discourse/
http://anti-shurtugal.andontie.net/2010/08/14/ironwings-mary-sue-discourse/
Thursday, March 10, 2011
The Story's Hero
In fantasy or epic stories, one thing that bugs me is how the hero is practically the same in every single one. I've noticed that the following have become very popular but also very overdone:
1) The hero starts off on a farm. There's nothing wrong with someone having farming origins, but there are plenty of other occupations that could be used instead. Your hero could come from a background in fishing, in hunting (though this one would depend on what kind of society you use, and it wouldn't really work in a Medieval-esque world... unless the family is poaching illegally), in mining, in forestry, or a number of other occupations.
2) The hero has obscure origins. In "The Inheritance Cycle", you have Eragon having an unknown father and a mother who was absent completely from his life. In "The Wheel of Time", the protagonist supposedly has parents but is revealed to have been adopted. It's rare to find a hero who has both parents still alive and who is living with them when the story begins.
3) The hero comes from a more remote region of the kingdom/empire/ civilization. I can't think of a recent hero that comes from a city or a more populated region. Granted, it does make for interesting interactions between a country boy and the big city, but it has been overused, in my opinion.
4) The hero falls for a princess or someone high up on the food chain. Eragon falls for Arya, Joraeim from "Beyond the Summerland" falls for Princess Wylla, and others do the same. I can't recall a hero who loves a girl from his hometown and returns to her at the end of everything; that, to me, is more romantic.
5) Another one is that the hero is somehow a descendant of a king or royalty or to whoever's ruling the place, which harkens back to his often-obscure origins. This too has been overdone, and I'd like to see a hero who is just an ordinary person with no connections to a ruling person.
These are just a few examples, but I find it sad that these five have been used so much in stories when there is greater potential for heroes and their background.
1) The hero starts off on a farm. There's nothing wrong with someone having farming origins, but there are plenty of other occupations that could be used instead. Your hero could come from a background in fishing, in hunting (though this one would depend on what kind of society you use, and it wouldn't really work in a Medieval-esque world... unless the family is poaching illegally), in mining, in forestry, or a number of other occupations.
2) The hero has obscure origins. In "The Inheritance Cycle", you have Eragon having an unknown father and a mother who was absent completely from his life. In "The Wheel of Time", the protagonist supposedly has parents but is revealed to have been adopted. It's rare to find a hero who has both parents still alive and who is living with them when the story begins.
3) The hero comes from a more remote region of the kingdom/empire/ civilization. I can't think of a recent hero that comes from a city or a more populated region. Granted, it does make for interesting interactions between a country boy and the big city, but it has been overused, in my opinion.
4) The hero falls for a princess or someone high up on the food chain. Eragon falls for Arya, Joraeim from "Beyond the Summerland" falls for Princess Wylla, and others do the same. I can't recall a hero who loves a girl from his hometown and returns to her at the end of everything; that, to me, is more romantic.
5) Another one is that the hero is somehow a descendant of a king or royalty or to whoever's ruling the place, which harkens back to his often-obscure origins. This too has been overdone, and I'd like to see a hero who is just an ordinary person with no connections to a ruling person.
These are just a few examples, but I find it sad that these five have been used so much in stories when there is greater potential for heroes and their background.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Book for Writers
This semester, I am taking my first college writing class called "advanced composition". One of our books is "Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace" by Joseph Williams, and my class has begun to read it. Even though we have not gotten very far, I recommend this book for writers, both fiction and non-fiction. The book tells you how to avoid dense sentences that leave your readers scratching their heads and basically how to write clearly yet to have style. It also has some helpful tips on grammatical rules (like which ones are real and when you can bend or break them at times). The book is clearly written and presents the concepts in a simple way, and the rules and such in them are true for all writers. I recommend that aspiring writers look into it for tips on improving their prose and their writing style.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
For Appearance's Sake
One thing that I have noticed in fantasy stories regarding the appearances of the characters is often how perfect they are. They may have perfectly straight teeth that look like they were made of pearls, the women often have long silky hair that gleams in the sunlight, or the females may often have a scent about them (like in "Inheritance Cycle" where Arya constantly smells of pine- at least, I believe it is pine needles. I haven't read the series in a while, so you'll have to forgive me). Normally this is not an issue considering our modern day and age where hygiene is very important, but this becomes a problem if your setting is in a Medieval-esque world or in an earlier time period.
Let me put it this way: hygiene did not become a major issue until about a hundred years ago. Unless you were Japanese, who were a very clean people, you did not take a bath that often, and, if you did, it only happened every month or so. For this reason, people wore lots of perfume and makeup to cover up their dirtiness. It was particularly worse in more rural regions where farmers and such were constantly working, and so they would come home covered in mud and who knows what. In these more rural areas, you not bathe very frequently and then, it was most likely only before attending important events. This form of hygiene would probably make us retch if we lived during those times, but keep in mind that no one else noticed the smell or your dirtiness that much unless you move from one area to another or between different cultures.
Not only were people dirty, but they were not concerned with their hair very much either. Soap was not common, and conditioner and hair dryers had not yet been invented yet. Not to mention the lice and other living things that could live in one's hair, especially a woman's. And women, unless they were more of the barbaric stock, probably ran a comb through their hair in the morning and put it up for the rest of the day. So, one would imagine that their hair was very unkempt and greasy from lack of washing.
And now, on to teeth. Dentists and orthodontists did not exist back then, and people did not brush their teeth. So finding someone with perfectly straight white teeth was probably a diamond in the rough and very rare.
My point in saying this is that most stories today, ones that are set in pre-modern eras, tend to have some character that has excellent hygiene along the lines of what we would see today. Your story may be a Medieval fantasy, but keep in mind that appearances back then were very different. You're not going to see perfect people in their appearances or in regards to hygiene. Particularly if your story has a lot of traveling in it, I doubt people in the traveling party are going to look well-groomed for very long. This may seem something odd to talk about writing, but I believe it is the details which can often make your world seem more real and down-to earth, no matter what genre or time period it is set in.
Let me put it this way: hygiene did not become a major issue until about a hundred years ago. Unless you were Japanese, who were a very clean people, you did not take a bath that often, and, if you did, it only happened every month or so. For this reason, people wore lots of perfume and makeup to cover up their dirtiness. It was particularly worse in more rural regions where farmers and such were constantly working, and so they would come home covered in mud and who knows what. In these more rural areas, you not bathe very frequently and then, it was most likely only before attending important events. This form of hygiene would probably make us retch if we lived during those times, but keep in mind that no one else noticed the smell or your dirtiness that much unless you move from one area to another or between different cultures.
Not only were people dirty, but they were not concerned with their hair very much either. Soap was not common, and conditioner and hair dryers had not yet been invented yet. Not to mention the lice and other living things that could live in one's hair, especially a woman's. And women, unless they were more of the barbaric stock, probably ran a comb through their hair in the morning and put it up for the rest of the day. So, one would imagine that their hair was very unkempt and greasy from lack of washing.
And now, on to teeth. Dentists and orthodontists did not exist back then, and people did not brush their teeth. So finding someone with perfectly straight white teeth was probably a diamond in the rough and very rare.
My point in saying this is that most stories today, ones that are set in pre-modern eras, tend to have some character that has excellent hygiene along the lines of what we would see today. Your story may be a Medieval fantasy, but keep in mind that appearances back then were very different. You're not going to see perfect people in their appearances or in regards to hygiene. Particularly if your story has a lot of traveling in it, I doubt people in the traveling party are going to look well-groomed for very long. This may seem something odd to talk about writing, but I believe it is the details which can often make your world seem more real and down-to earth, no matter what genre or time period it is set in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
