Lately, I've been reading stuff from another blogger who's been critiquing "Twilight," and one of her posts got me thinking about something that I think writers sometimes forget about: the occasional need for research.
In one of her posts, someone commented on how Stephanie Meyer didn't do any research on Washington weather because her description doesn't seem to fit with how it works in real-life. In another comment, someone else mentioned that Meyer picked a random date for the start of the story that doesn't make sense given with the timeline (e.g. the starting point almost seems to indicate that Bella first went to school on a Saturday or something like that). These comments got me thinking about research (an occasional hobby of mine) and how important it is for writers, whether it be a little or a lot.
In stories, especially those that have at least some kind of basis in the real world, a writer must be careful not to write something that's very inaccurate, like clearly not knowing what Washington weather looks like. Because otherwise, your story will be full of mistakes, and readers will notice it. An author who does no research at all will look lazy and like they just threw stuff together, but those who at least make an attempt to be accurate will have more realistic stories, plots, characters, locations, etc...
I've had to put this into practice with my current work-in-progress, a fantasy story that's partially set in our world. When I had a character suffering from extreme blood loss, I had to do research on the condition and treatment to make sure that his body was acting accurately and that he could be treated properly, even though magic was involved in his healing. In the same story, I mentioned other characters who were talking about the UK version of X-Factor. However, when I compared the story's timeline to reality, I found that they didn't mesh, so I did a quick wikipedia search and looked up what would have been big in the entertainment industry in that area of the timeline, which turned out to be Doctor Who-related. Another thing I had to do was figure out how long it would take for someone to drive from a village in western Ireland to the eastern side, which also took a quick search. And all this research (and others not mentioned here) took me less than five minutes and mostly involved wikipedia (maybe another website or two if I needed more details for whatever reason); basically, I looked it up, wrote it down in the story, and then moved on with whatever I was doing. It's not that difficult.
However, there are times where you can add things, like a fictional restaurant to a real-life city, but if your restaurant happens to be high-end French cuisine, you should probably do research to make sure that the menu is accurate.
In the end, basic research for a story is not difficult. Looking for accurate details for your story (whether it be knowing what kind of dishes were used in 800 AD or what kind of sword was popular in 1000 BC) helps make it seem more real, and it shows that you're putting effort into it and that you care about what details you put in there.
As an end note, for the blog I mentioned earlier, here's a link.
http://www.anamardoll.com/2011/02/twilight-twilight-deconstruction-index.html
Even though I don't agree with everything the writer says, she does bring up some very valid points about stories that have made me take a closer look at my own.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
A Blurb on Kings
I apologize for the lack of posts on here. I have had trouble coming up with topics, but I have been inspired by my latest history geek-out session (yes, I am a history geek if you haven't figured that out yet).
Over the past several months, I have been doing basic research (which is basically me using wikipedia... good enough for basics; if I want to learn more, I'm sure better books have been written for such things) on various monarchies. I've done Britain, France, and Russia so far, and I'm in the middle of researching Byzantine emperors. One of the interesting things that I have discovered in this research is how each monarchy was vastly different and functioned. We tend to think that kings ascending to the throne is a simple matter of the king's son or otherwise nearest male relative being chosen because of his mere birthright. However, it can be far more varied than that.
In Britain, for example, lines of ascension tend to be pretty easy to follow. All kings of unified England have been descended from Alfred the Great, and so there have been no "peasants" on the throne; even wars for the throne were fought by relatives or at least by people claiming to be relatives; however, there were also no laws preventing women from ruling either, though no female monarchs took the throne until Mary I (not counting Matilda, granddaughter of William the Conqueror, or Lady Jane Gray), and queens after that point never had to struggle to prove themselves worthy of the throne. Russia was pretty much the same way, though the family trees were more twisted and did not follow the usual pattern of father -> son and several claimants to the throne were either murdered or locked up to keep them off the throne, whether they were male or female. France, on the other hand, followed Salic Law, which forbade females from reigning, as well as preventing any rulers from being descended through a female line; this led to constant wars over the throne and a constant jumping around in the branches of family trees for centuries whenever a male line died out. The Byzantines, so far, have also proved to be different in that several early emperors died childless or only having daughters; so the emperors chose their son-in-laws to reign or elected military leaders, or other military leaders not related at all to the imperial or aristocratic families were elected after the fact, so you do not really have family dynasties like you would in England or in France.
My point in this is that as a writer, if you want to be inspired by real-life monarchies when writing your own hereditary government, you do not have to stick to the traditional father -> son model that is generally used. While this is certainly true, at other times it was not the case. You can either use the stuff that I've mentioned here or look it up yourself to get ideas, but you should play around with it in changing how a government chooses a successor. It could be that the king/emperor/whatever you call it can name anyone, even a peasant, as a successor. Or maybe it is the oldest child, whether male or female. Or maybe the ruler has no choice in the matter and a cabinet of sorts chooses the successor. Whatever the case, play with whatever idea suits you. This could also lead to some interesting plot ideas about political power and enable you to create a fascinating world with a new government system that is unlike what most novels nowadays portray monarchies as being.
So, as I said, let your imagination have fun and go at it. Even the most basic of research can give you some interesting ideas that could be prime story material.
Over the past several months, I have been doing basic research (which is basically me using wikipedia... good enough for basics; if I want to learn more, I'm sure better books have been written for such things) on various monarchies. I've done Britain, France, and Russia so far, and I'm in the middle of researching Byzantine emperors. One of the interesting things that I have discovered in this research is how each monarchy was vastly different and functioned. We tend to think that kings ascending to the throne is a simple matter of the king's son or otherwise nearest male relative being chosen because of his mere birthright. However, it can be far more varied than that.
In Britain, for example, lines of ascension tend to be pretty easy to follow. All kings of unified England have been descended from Alfred the Great, and so there have been no "peasants" on the throne; even wars for the throne were fought by relatives or at least by people claiming to be relatives; however, there were also no laws preventing women from ruling either, though no female monarchs took the throne until Mary I (not counting Matilda, granddaughter of William the Conqueror, or Lady Jane Gray), and queens after that point never had to struggle to prove themselves worthy of the throne. Russia was pretty much the same way, though the family trees were more twisted and did not follow the usual pattern of father -> son and several claimants to the throne were either murdered or locked up to keep them off the throne, whether they were male or female. France, on the other hand, followed Salic Law, which forbade females from reigning, as well as preventing any rulers from being descended through a female line; this led to constant wars over the throne and a constant jumping around in the branches of family trees for centuries whenever a male line died out. The Byzantines, so far, have also proved to be different in that several early emperors died childless or only having daughters; so the emperors chose their son-in-laws to reign or elected military leaders, or other military leaders not related at all to the imperial or aristocratic families were elected after the fact, so you do not really have family dynasties like you would in England or in France.
My point in this is that as a writer, if you want to be inspired by real-life monarchies when writing your own hereditary government, you do not have to stick to the traditional father -> son model that is generally used. While this is certainly true, at other times it was not the case. You can either use the stuff that I've mentioned here or look it up yourself to get ideas, but you should play around with it in changing how a government chooses a successor. It could be that the king/emperor/whatever you call it can name anyone, even a peasant, as a successor. Or maybe it is the oldest child, whether male or female. Or maybe the ruler has no choice in the matter and a cabinet of sorts chooses the successor. Whatever the case, play with whatever idea suits you. This could also lead to some interesting plot ideas about political power and enable you to create a fascinating world with a new government system that is unlike what most novels nowadays portray monarchies as being.
So, as I said, let your imagination have fun and go at it. Even the most basic of research can give you some interesting ideas that could be prime story material.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Pronunciation
This post will be largely for those writing fantasy or stories that require you to make up names or your own language.
When I write stories that require me to make up my own names or a semblance of a language, one thing I am reminded of is that I need to be consistent. Languages are tricky, especially when pronunciation can be varied depending on different factors. This is especially true when you are used to saying a certain letter (like e) a certain way but it may be different in another language. I found this to be true when I studied Latin and Spanish in school, and I was also reminded of this recently when working on my latest novel attempt. In my current story, the majority of my characters have names that come directly from the Scottish Gaelic dictionary. However, Scottish Gaelic, you don't pronounce the words as they look; just listen to Gaelic songs by Clannad, Altan, or some other Irish band and look at the Gaelic lyrics, and you'll get what I mean. So, in early drafts of this story, I was mispronouncing the majority of the names.
I wanted to make sure that my characters' and place names were pronounced at least semi-properly (and I don't know Gaelic), so I did a little basic research. Gaelic is a complex language, and it would be nigh impossible for me to pronounce the words correctly. However, because of my story, it is necessary that there be variations between Scottish Gaelic and between the Faerie language of my characters. So, my solution was relatively simple: for letters that have lots of varying pronunciations, pick one and stick with it consistently. So, if the dipthong "dh" has two different pronunciations depending on the surrounding letters, I pick the pronunciation "y" and stick with it consistently throughout the entire story. The difficult thing with this is that this means I have to write down all the names of characters and places and make sure that I know how every single one is correctly pronounced. Then I'll be writing all of them down with the proper pronunciation beside them, so that both myself and any potential readers know how to say the names correctly.
My point in saying all of this is that when you make up names or loosely base your names off of a real, existing language that you need to make sure they are consistent. Both for your sake and for the sake of your readers, so that you can maintain continuity and prevent confusion as to how your names are being pronounced.
When I write stories that require me to make up my own names or a semblance of a language, one thing I am reminded of is that I need to be consistent. Languages are tricky, especially when pronunciation can be varied depending on different factors. This is especially true when you are used to saying a certain letter (like e) a certain way but it may be different in another language. I found this to be true when I studied Latin and Spanish in school, and I was also reminded of this recently when working on my latest novel attempt. In my current story, the majority of my characters have names that come directly from the Scottish Gaelic dictionary. However, Scottish Gaelic, you don't pronounce the words as they look; just listen to Gaelic songs by Clannad, Altan, or some other Irish band and look at the Gaelic lyrics, and you'll get what I mean. So, in early drafts of this story, I was mispronouncing the majority of the names.
I wanted to make sure that my characters' and place names were pronounced at least semi-properly (and I don't know Gaelic), so I did a little basic research. Gaelic is a complex language, and it would be nigh impossible for me to pronounce the words correctly. However, because of my story, it is necessary that there be variations between Scottish Gaelic and between the Faerie language of my characters. So, my solution was relatively simple: for letters that have lots of varying pronunciations, pick one and stick with it consistently. So, if the dipthong "dh" has two different pronunciations depending on the surrounding letters, I pick the pronunciation "y" and stick with it consistently throughout the entire story. The difficult thing with this is that this means I have to write down all the names of characters and places and make sure that I know how every single one is correctly pronounced. Then I'll be writing all of them down with the proper pronunciation beside them, so that both myself and any potential readers know how to say the names correctly.
My point in saying all of this is that when you make up names or loosely base your names off of a real, existing language that you need to make sure they are consistent. Both for your sake and for the sake of your readers, so that you can maintain continuity and prevent confusion as to how your names are being pronounced.
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Another Medieval Book
For Christmas this year, I got another book on Medieval culture that I have enjoyed reading and hope to use for future reference for future stories.
This book is called "The Time Traveler's Guide to Medieval England" by Ian Mortimer, and it will be easier to find, given that the last Medieval book I recommended is out of print (I only discovered this recently). This book only focuses on the fourteenth century (the 1300's) in England, but it is very in-depth. It goes into great detail in describing how towns looked like, what different classes ate, what fashions were and how they changed particularly in that century, disease of the time period, etc... It is a very neat book, and the author is a good writer too. I will give one warning for certain people: the book has some PG-13 content given some of the language used during the time period, the violence, and even some of the "medical" cures for diseases; so while I recommend the book, read at your own risk.
This book is called "The Time Traveler's Guide to Medieval England" by Ian Mortimer, and it will be easier to find, given that the last Medieval book I recommended is out of print (I only discovered this recently). This book only focuses on the fourteenth century (the 1300's) in England, but it is very in-depth. It goes into great detail in describing how towns looked like, what different classes ate, what fashions were and how they changed particularly in that century, disease of the time period, etc... It is a very neat book, and the author is a good writer too. I will give one warning for certain people: the book has some PG-13 content given some of the language used during the time period, the violence, and even some of the "medical" cures for diseases; so while I recommend the book, read at your own risk.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Medieval Book Recommendation
This post is both for people with an interest in writing historical stories based during the Medieval Period and in writing Medieval-esque fantasy.
Over the weekend, I visited the library and ended up checking out a book titled "The Writer's Guide to Everyday Life in the Middle Ages" by Sherrilyn Kenyon. This book is short and a pretty easy read. Basically, it is a brief summary about the Middle Ages of western Europe in various aspects of the society and culture. For example, one whole chapter is devoted to what kinds of food were available, silverware and dishes, and spices, and another one gives a look at popular fashions during certain years. There are also other short chapters about Medieval celebrations, the church, family, and even a list of kings of England during the time period. The book is not overly comprehensive, but it provides a good summary; at the end of each chapter, the author gives a list of recommended books on the particular topic that you wish to look further into.
So, if you want to make sure you are writing a realistic story set during the Medieval period or want to make your fantasy story feel more genuinely Medieval, this book is a good tool to have in getting some of the details and providing other sources for further research.
Over the weekend, I visited the library and ended up checking out a book titled "The Writer's Guide to Everyday Life in the Middle Ages" by Sherrilyn Kenyon. This book is short and a pretty easy read. Basically, it is a brief summary about the Middle Ages of western Europe in various aspects of the society and culture. For example, one whole chapter is devoted to what kinds of food were available, silverware and dishes, and spices, and another one gives a look at popular fashions during certain years. There are also other short chapters about Medieval celebrations, the church, family, and even a list of kings of England during the time period. The book is not overly comprehensive, but it provides a good summary; at the end of each chapter, the author gives a list of recommended books on the particular topic that you wish to look further into.
So, if you want to make sure you are writing a realistic story set during the Medieval period or want to make your fantasy story feel more genuinely Medieval, this book is a good tool to have in getting some of the details and providing other sources for further research.
Thursday, July 19, 2012
More on Romance
Lately, I've been in a period drama mood, both in my writing and in the movies I watch. While I've been grinning like an idiot as I watch certain romantic couples get together for a happily ever after, it got me to thinking of two problems with romance stories that unfortunately do happen in period dramas but also in any kind of story genre.
Awkward Crush Behavior
I noted this one when I recently watched BBC's "Cranford" and its sequel "Return to Cranford" a few weeks ago. In "Cranford," which is basically a set of intertwined stories that all take place in a mid-19th century English town, the new doctor Dr. Harrison develops feelings for Sophy, the daughter of the local rector. For the majority of the series, the two are constantly giving each other silly, knowing grins and generally acting awkward; they have little interaction beyond the occasional conversation or if they are brought together because of a medical crisis, and so to me their romance comes across as shallow and of them being continually twitterpated.
I found the same to be true for "Return to Cranford." *dons armor for protection from screaming fangirls* William Buxton, who comes from a wealthy family, meets Peggy, a girl from a poorer family, and it turns into another quick-paced romance. Like Dr. Harrison and Sophy, their romance is more focused on their awkward, shy glances and interactions. There are a few cute moments between them, but ultimately their love feels more like them being stuck in the early twitterpated stage and never moves beyond that to something deeper.
The issue with those two romances is that there was little substance to them. The two couples remained stuck in the awkward, love-struck stage and had little true, serious interaction with each other. It is important that your romantic characters have interaction with each other, whether it be them spending a lot of time together talking, doing something they both enjoy, going out, etc... Their romance cannot be solely based on shy glances, awkward attempts at conversations, or just being awkward around each other in general.
I Hate you... I love you
I noted this one when I watched BBC's adaptation of "North and South" yesterday. In "North and South," the heroine Margaret Hale quickly butts heads with mill owner Mr. Thornton, accusing him of mistreating his workers and of being a cold-hearted businessman, and so the two don't get along very well. He falls in love with her, but she rejects his proposal, leading him to ignore her afterwards while she gives him longing glances. Even though the end of the series makes me smile, unfortunately there is not enough time given for the couple's relationship to develop. It starts off with both of them giving each other suspicious glances, Margaret becoming very accusatory and critical, she rejects the proposal and claims she would do so again, but she softens up and views him in a different light after that. The issue here is that Margaret changed her mind too suddenly; one day she was content to see Thornton as a greedy mill owner, and the next she believes him to be an honest manager who is not as cold as she thought he was. There was no grand event to change her mind; it was rather sudden. Thornton also does this; he tolerates Margaret, hates her after the proposal and acts coldly towards her, but at other times he acts civil and like he still has feelings for her even though he said his love for her was over. He too abruptly changed his tune about Margaret, and there was no reason given for it.
The issue here is that your two characters cannot rapidly change from "I have a strong dislike of you" to "oh, you are the best man/ woman I've ever met; I love you." No, no. If you are going to have a romance progress from hatred to love, then you need to have plenty of time to let it develop and change gradually, not in the short period of a few weeks with little to no interaction between the two.
The common theme of these two issues is that your characters need to have interaction before they fall in love. Their romance cannot be solely based on awkward glances or actions more reminiscent of a teenage crush, and it cannot progress from hatred to romance for no reason. It is important that the two characters interact, talk of deeper and more sober subjects, do things together, etc... It is also important that you allow for enough time to pass for the relationship to develop and that you allow for the relationship to grow deeper, not stay in the early love-sick stage permanently.
Awkward Crush Behavior
I noted this one when I recently watched BBC's "Cranford" and its sequel "Return to Cranford" a few weeks ago. In "Cranford," which is basically a set of intertwined stories that all take place in a mid-19th century English town, the new doctor Dr. Harrison develops feelings for Sophy, the daughter of the local rector. For the majority of the series, the two are constantly giving each other silly, knowing grins and generally acting awkward; they have little interaction beyond the occasional conversation or if they are brought together because of a medical crisis, and so to me their romance comes across as shallow and of them being continually twitterpated.
I found the same to be true for "Return to Cranford." *dons armor for protection from screaming fangirls* William Buxton, who comes from a wealthy family, meets Peggy, a girl from a poorer family, and it turns into another quick-paced romance. Like Dr. Harrison and Sophy, their romance is more focused on their awkward, shy glances and interactions. There are a few cute moments between them, but ultimately their love feels more like them being stuck in the early twitterpated stage and never moves beyond that to something deeper.
The issue with those two romances is that there was little substance to them. The two couples remained stuck in the awkward, love-struck stage and had little true, serious interaction with each other. It is important that your romantic characters have interaction with each other, whether it be them spending a lot of time together talking, doing something they both enjoy, going out, etc... Their romance cannot be solely based on shy glances, awkward attempts at conversations, or just being awkward around each other in general.
I Hate you... I love you
I noted this one when I watched BBC's adaptation of "North and South" yesterday. In "North and South," the heroine Margaret Hale quickly butts heads with mill owner Mr. Thornton, accusing him of mistreating his workers and of being a cold-hearted businessman, and so the two don't get along very well. He falls in love with her, but she rejects his proposal, leading him to ignore her afterwards while she gives him longing glances. Even though the end of the series makes me smile, unfortunately there is not enough time given for the couple's relationship to develop. It starts off with both of them giving each other suspicious glances, Margaret becoming very accusatory and critical, she rejects the proposal and claims she would do so again, but she softens up and views him in a different light after that. The issue here is that Margaret changed her mind too suddenly; one day she was content to see Thornton as a greedy mill owner, and the next she believes him to be an honest manager who is not as cold as she thought he was. There was no grand event to change her mind; it was rather sudden. Thornton also does this; he tolerates Margaret, hates her after the proposal and acts coldly towards her, but at other times he acts civil and like he still has feelings for her even though he said his love for her was over. He too abruptly changed his tune about Margaret, and there was no reason given for it.
The issue here is that your two characters cannot rapidly change from "I have a strong dislike of you" to "oh, you are the best man/ woman I've ever met; I love you." No, no. If you are going to have a romance progress from hatred to love, then you need to have plenty of time to let it develop and change gradually, not in the short period of a few weeks with little to no interaction between the two.
The common theme of these two issues is that your characters need to have interaction before they fall in love. Their romance cannot be solely based on awkward glances or actions more reminiscent of a teenage crush, and it cannot progress from hatred to romance for no reason. It is important that the two characters interact, talk of deeper and more sober subjects, do things together, etc... It is also important that you allow for enough time to pass for the relationship to develop and that you allow for the relationship to grow deeper, not stay in the early love-sick stage permanently.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
Keeping Words in Perspective
A while back, I was working on one of my fantasy stories when I wrote a scene where the main character is being carried in flight over his home forest and where he describes the forest below like an ocean on a stormy day. When I went back to the scene later, I realized something was wrong. My main character lived in a place where it would have been impossible for him to have ever seen the ocean before, and so his description would be very inconsistent with his personal knowledge. This led me to thinking about the use of certain words and descriptions in stories.
Given our modern day today, including an internet that allows you to do quick searches in the blink of an eye and cameras that can take pictures of places that we have never seen before, most people can get some kind of taste of what lies outside our own personal world. However, in the days before instantaneous digital searches, such things did not exist. If you lived on the 19th century American frontier, it was highly unlikely that you had ever seen the ocean. If you lived in the deserts of the Middle East, you likely had never seen a river or forests before. So, if you had never experienced those things, the words "forests," "oceans," or "rivers" would probably not be in your vocabulary.
Related to this is seen in time or culture clashes. I'm currently working on a story where the character comes from a fantasy-esque world and enters our own modern day. His technology is pre-Medieval European, and so he has no idea what cars, modern medicine, phones, etc... are. So when he describes seeing the modern world, I have to describe it using words that he would know but also making sure that the audience gets some small understanding of what I'm describing on paper.
So, when you are writing a story, keep in mind what words you are using. Are they ones that your characters are familiar with? And can you give your audience enough simple clues for them to figure out what you are describing? This is important because it keeps your writing realistic.
Given our modern day today, including an internet that allows you to do quick searches in the blink of an eye and cameras that can take pictures of places that we have never seen before, most people can get some kind of taste of what lies outside our own personal world. However, in the days before instantaneous digital searches, such things did not exist. If you lived on the 19th century American frontier, it was highly unlikely that you had ever seen the ocean. If you lived in the deserts of the Middle East, you likely had never seen a river or forests before. So, if you had never experienced those things, the words "forests," "oceans," or "rivers" would probably not be in your vocabulary.
Related to this is seen in time or culture clashes. I'm currently working on a story where the character comes from a fantasy-esque world and enters our own modern day. His technology is pre-Medieval European, and so he has no idea what cars, modern medicine, phones, etc... are. So when he describes seeing the modern world, I have to describe it using words that he would know but also making sure that the audience gets some small understanding of what I'm describing on paper.
So, when you are writing a story, keep in mind what words you are using. Are they ones that your characters are familiar with? And can you give your audience enough simple clues for them to figure out what you are describing? This is important because it keeps your writing realistic.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Biological Questions
In fantasy, sci-fi, or even paranormal genres, it is not uncommon for the writer to either make up their own race or to do a variation of a race that has already been created, such as vampires or elves. However, when you do this, you also need to keep in mind some of the biology and anatomy of said race. Consider the following examples:
1) Get a basic idea of what the race looks like. Are there any distinguishing features or anything that sets them apart from other races? For several years, I've been developing a race of winged humanoids, and I am currently trying to figure out what their wings look like and how the wings can seemingly disappear when not in use. So, if your race has something like wings or some "non-human" feature then decide what it looks like, if the feature can be hidden at certain times, etc... You don't have to go into insane detail over it, but get enough so that the feature remains consistent throughout the story.
2) How long does this race live? If its people either have longer lives than normal or are immortal, how does the aging process work? Do they age more slowly than people, or do they stop physically aging at or around a certain point? Again, make sure this is consistent in your race.
3) Can this race interbreed with other races? Tolkien let his elves interbreed with humans to form the half-elves, and Stephanie Meyer reluctantly allowed for the existence of half-vampires, which brings me to the main gist. According to Meyer's version of vampires, they cannot have children, but it is possible for them to have children with humans (though it likely results in the death of the mother); however, biologically, this would not be possible because vampires are supposedly sterile, and you cannot expect offspring if one of the partners is supposedly sterile. So, if you decide to have cross-race romance with a child as a result, keep this in mind: either make it possible for both of the individuals to bear children or make it so that both of them together cannot have children. Or, as one friend suggested to me, make the children sterile, unable to have children of their own one day.
4) If the story calls for it, make sure you get some detail on the biological/ anatomical aspects of a race. For example, I've been working on sort of a rewrite/ rebuttal of "Twilight" and the whole paranormal genres. Because of flaws in Meyer's version of vampires, I've tried to improve on them by offering a semi-biological reason for why my vampires heal fairly quickly, why they are largely resistant to illness, and why they all have problems with fertility. I had to do this because, even though I may never state the reasons in the story, I want to make sure that the race remains consistent but also realistic.
Those are just a few considerations that popped in my head, so consider them if you are creating a new race(s) for your story.
1) Get a basic idea of what the race looks like. Are there any distinguishing features or anything that sets them apart from other races? For several years, I've been developing a race of winged humanoids, and I am currently trying to figure out what their wings look like and how the wings can seemingly disappear when not in use. So, if your race has something like wings or some "non-human" feature then decide what it looks like, if the feature can be hidden at certain times, etc... You don't have to go into insane detail over it, but get enough so that the feature remains consistent throughout the story.
2) How long does this race live? If its people either have longer lives than normal or are immortal, how does the aging process work? Do they age more slowly than people, or do they stop physically aging at or around a certain point? Again, make sure this is consistent in your race.
3) Can this race interbreed with other races? Tolkien let his elves interbreed with humans to form the half-elves, and Stephanie Meyer reluctantly allowed for the existence of half-vampires, which brings me to the main gist. According to Meyer's version of vampires, they cannot have children, but it is possible for them to have children with humans (though it likely results in the death of the mother); however, biologically, this would not be possible because vampires are supposedly sterile, and you cannot expect offspring if one of the partners is supposedly sterile. So, if you decide to have cross-race romance with a child as a result, keep this in mind: either make it possible for both of the individuals to bear children or make it so that both of them together cannot have children. Or, as one friend suggested to me, make the children sterile, unable to have children of their own one day.
4) If the story calls for it, make sure you get some detail on the biological/ anatomical aspects of a race. For example, I've been working on sort of a rewrite/ rebuttal of "Twilight" and the whole paranormal genres. Because of flaws in Meyer's version of vampires, I've tried to improve on them by offering a semi-biological reason for why my vampires heal fairly quickly, why they are largely resistant to illness, and why they all have problems with fertility. I had to do this because, even though I may never state the reasons in the story, I want to make sure that the race remains consistent but also realistic.
Those are just a few considerations that popped in my head, so consider them if you are creating a new race(s) for your story.
Tuesday, April 24, 2012
On Names
When you start a story, a big thing you have to figure out is character names, something which will enable you and your reader to identify them. I have just a few points today.
1. Keep names simple. I've noticed that some of the most memorable characters in literature, TV, movies, or other mediums are the ones with simple names. Consider characters like James Bond, Harry Potter, Jack Bauer, Frodo Baggins, Katniss Everdeen, etc... Their names are not five syllables long or impossible to pronounce or remember. Now, I'm not saying going for names like "John Doe" or something bland. Find a name for your character(s) that is easy to pronounce, easy to remember, but also something that is distinguishable from other characters, whether your own or other writers'm, and the same thing goes for names you may make up for science fiction, fantasy, or related genras.
2. Make sure the name fits. There are some names that, when combined with a character, just fit perfectly; you can't imagine them having a different name. However, there likely will be times when you just can't find the right name. In one of my stories, my protagonist was called "Agnes" but when I started the second draft I changed her name to "Angelica." I'm still not happy with her name, and I'm still experimenting with other names to find the perfect one, though I'm happy with the names of the other characters in the story. If the name doesn't fit, then keep looking for the right one.
3. Make sure two different characters don't have similar names. Years ago when I was creating tons of names for a fantasy world that I was working on, there were a few names that sounded alike. It took me some time, but I eventually realized that readers would get confused about which character was which, so I started changing a few of the names. Within the past year, I had to do this again in a recent novel attempt, where I had a brother and a sister named Alex and Allie, both of whom had variations of the name "Alexander" or "Alexandra" as their full name. To help distinguish between the two (and to prevent the girl from having a name too similar to the literary character she was loosely based on), I changed the girl's name to Meg, which fits her much better. So, keep an eye on your character names and make sure that they don't sound too alike.
I may think of other tips later, but consider these points when naming your characters.
1. Keep names simple. I've noticed that some of the most memorable characters in literature, TV, movies, or other mediums are the ones with simple names. Consider characters like James Bond, Harry Potter, Jack Bauer, Frodo Baggins, Katniss Everdeen, etc... Their names are not five syllables long or impossible to pronounce or remember. Now, I'm not saying going for names like "John Doe" or something bland. Find a name for your character(s) that is easy to pronounce, easy to remember, but also something that is distinguishable from other characters, whether your own or other writers'm, and the same thing goes for names you may make up for science fiction, fantasy, or related genras.
2. Make sure the name fits. There are some names that, when combined with a character, just fit perfectly; you can't imagine them having a different name. However, there likely will be times when you just can't find the right name. In one of my stories, my protagonist was called "Agnes" but when I started the second draft I changed her name to "Angelica." I'm still not happy with her name, and I'm still experimenting with other names to find the perfect one, though I'm happy with the names of the other characters in the story. If the name doesn't fit, then keep looking for the right one.
3. Make sure two different characters don't have similar names. Years ago when I was creating tons of names for a fantasy world that I was working on, there were a few names that sounded alike. It took me some time, but I eventually realized that readers would get confused about which character was which, so I started changing a few of the names. Within the past year, I had to do this again in a recent novel attempt, where I had a brother and a sister named Alex and Allie, both of whom had variations of the name "Alexander" or "Alexandra" as their full name. To help distinguish between the two (and to prevent the girl from having a name too similar to the literary character she was loosely based on), I changed the girl's name to Meg, which fits her much better. So, keep an eye on your character names and make sure that they don't sound too alike.
I may think of other tips later, but consider these points when naming your characters.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Do Your Historical Homework
In an earlier post, I mentioned that if you are writing historical fiction that you should do some research before diving in. I am currently in the process of proofing a work from that genre, and I have more specific examples of what to research when writing in that genre.
1. Names
When you are writing a story set in historical times and characters that are fictional, you need to make sure that the name existed at that time period because names change over the centuries. For example, in a story that I have been planning for some time, I have a character whose name is Allie; but, since she was born in sixteenth century Europe, I did a bit of research to determine what variations of the name "Alexandra" existed around the time of her birth. A simple search turned up some options, including the name "Alisandre," which I decided to use. Also, you have to keep in mind what kind of names your culture would use. The Scottish people would use different names than someone living in Italy would, and even a similar name would very likely have different spelling depending on the culture and location of the story.
2. Attitudes and Behaviors
Another common misconception in historical fiction is that people back then thought and acted the same way we do today. While to some extent that is true, to another extent it isn't. People in the 18th century thought very differently from people in the 21st century. For example, in a work I recently read, two characters (one of whom is a pre-teen and the other is a young teenager) have a crush on each other that their parents tease them about but otherwise view as innocent. While this would more than likely be true of the 21st century, this is highly unlikely to have occurred in the 18th century. Unless you're Henry IV of England and his first wife in the Middle Ages (which was likely not a romantic marriage anyway), teenagers back then were not expected to have boyfriends, girlfriends, or crushes until they were adults. And certainly not until the man had enough wealth and was settled enough to provide for a family. So a crush happening that young in life back then would have been highly unlikely or at least not mentioned; if it was noticed, I doubt the parents would have tolerated it.
That is one example of attitudes, but it is a reminder to keep people's attitudes and behaviors realistic. Otherwise, your story will be unrealistic.
3. Slang
Another thing that will be different is the slang that people use. In a story I'm reading, the characters use slang like "gosh" and "lots of" very frequently; however, I also doubt that this was very realistic for the time period. So, keep in mind that your characters are living in a different time period and will have different "slang" words, not the ones we commonly use today.
4. Food
When I think of Medieval stories, one thing that I wish writers would remember is that food back then wasn't like it was today. Fridges, stoves, and ovens weren't invented until the late 19th or early 20th centuries. Unless you lived in an extraordinarily cold climate, your meat would quickly spoil, which is why people covered it with salt or spices: to hide the fact that it was bad. Fruits and vegetables had to be dried or eaten quickly if you wanted it to taste good. There were no artificial preservatives, which meant that bread and pastries wouldn't last long either and would likely turn moldy very quickly. Not to mention that stoves and ovens didn't exist until recently, so cooking the food over an open flame would probably result in food that wasn't always cooked properly.
I will probably find other examples, but for now, think about these things if you are writing historical fiction. Do a little research, and it will definitely help you make your story feel more realistic and not like a basic modern story abruptly thrown into a previous century.
1. Names
When you are writing a story set in historical times and characters that are fictional, you need to make sure that the name existed at that time period because names change over the centuries. For example, in a story that I have been planning for some time, I have a character whose name is Allie; but, since she was born in sixteenth century Europe, I did a bit of research to determine what variations of the name "Alexandra" existed around the time of her birth. A simple search turned up some options, including the name "Alisandre," which I decided to use. Also, you have to keep in mind what kind of names your culture would use. The Scottish people would use different names than someone living in Italy would, and even a similar name would very likely have different spelling depending on the culture and location of the story.
2. Attitudes and Behaviors
Another common misconception in historical fiction is that people back then thought and acted the same way we do today. While to some extent that is true, to another extent it isn't. People in the 18th century thought very differently from people in the 21st century. For example, in a work I recently read, two characters (one of whom is a pre-teen and the other is a young teenager) have a crush on each other that their parents tease them about but otherwise view as innocent. While this would more than likely be true of the 21st century, this is highly unlikely to have occurred in the 18th century. Unless you're Henry IV of England and his first wife in the Middle Ages (which was likely not a romantic marriage anyway), teenagers back then were not expected to have boyfriends, girlfriends, or crushes until they were adults. And certainly not until the man had enough wealth and was settled enough to provide for a family. So a crush happening that young in life back then would have been highly unlikely or at least not mentioned; if it was noticed, I doubt the parents would have tolerated it.
That is one example of attitudes, but it is a reminder to keep people's attitudes and behaviors realistic. Otherwise, your story will be unrealistic.
3. Slang
Another thing that will be different is the slang that people use. In a story I'm reading, the characters use slang like "gosh" and "lots of" very frequently; however, I also doubt that this was very realistic for the time period. So, keep in mind that your characters are living in a different time period and will have different "slang" words, not the ones we commonly use today.
4. Food
When I think of Medieval stories, one thing that I wish writers would remember is that food back then wasn't like it was today. Fridges, stoves, and ovens weren't invented until the late 19th or early 20th centuries. Unless you lived in an extraordinarily cold climate, your meat would quickly spoil, which is why people covered it with salt or spices: to hide the fact that it was bad. Fruits and vegetables had to be dried or eaten quickly if you wanted it to taste good. There were no artificial preservatives, which meant that bread and pastries wouldn't last long either and would likely turn moldy very quickly. Not to mention that stoves and ovens didn't exist until recently, so cooking the food over an open flame would probably result in food that wasn't always cooked properly.
I will probably find other examples, but for now, think about these things if you are writing historical fiction. Do a little research, and it will definitely help you make your story feel more realistic and not like a basic modern story abruptly thrown into a previous century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
