Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Jan 11-17, 2015

I am so tired . . . but more about that on the weekend. In the meantime, enjoy some Writerly Goodness!

Agent Laurie McLean of Fuse Literary guest posts on Anne R. Allen’s blog: You may not need an agent, but why you may want one anyway.

Karen Woodward outlines her critique process.

The anatomy of a kick-ass query letter, from DIYMFA.

Eight query tips no one tells writers from agent Carly Watters.

Writing a synopsis. Janice Hardy’s Fiction University.

How to turn a short story into a novel. Roz Morris helps you Nail Your Novel.

How to transition to your story’s climax with a gatekeeper by Christine Frazier of the Better Novel Project.

Advice about advice from Jamie Raintree.

Then, Jamie posted this over on Writers in the Storm: four steps to happy writing productivity. Who says you can’t be happy and productive?

Delilah S. Dawson guest posts on Chuck Wendig’s Terribleminds. 25 lifehacks for writers from a hack writer 🙂

Nnedi Okorafor looks at why science fiction created by African writers is still considered alien.

Quill & Quire previews spring 2015 books.

Buzzfeed compiles a list of 33 of the creepiest lines in fiction.

From Elle: How many women does it take to create the perfect sex scene? You know which one we’re talking about, don’t you? Oh yeah. Outlander: The Wedding.

The latest Outlander trailer for the second half of season one:

 

And . . . an Outlander soundtrack! In case you love the music as much as the show (and the novels) 🙂

The science of Game of Thrones. It’s okay to be smart.

 

And that she be it for this Tipsday!

Buh-bye, la!

Tipsday

Why is shifting point of view (POV) problematic?

For the second time in as many weeks, a writer friend has suggested a post to me. This time, it was about POV. In a short story I recently critiqued, the POV (third person, past tense) shifted from a mother to her daughter. I recommended either sticking with one POV, or marking the change with more than just textual cues.

My writer friend indicated that she had a film background and asked if the omniscient POV wouldn’t allow her to shift her focus between characters in a scene.

What follows is my response.

A wee caveat: this is based on my own craft learning to date. I’m happy to lay the burden of expertise at the feet of others 🙂


 

First, you should check out CS Lakin’s blog: LiveWriteThrive

You may have to go fairly far back in her archives, but she did a series on writing based on film techniques last year. She turned this into a book, Shoot your novel, which you can find on Amazon.

This might appeal to your filmic aesthetic.

Now, having said that, film techniques aren’t the same as POV in writing. Parallels can be drawn, but really, they’re two different things.

POV in writing is about who’s telling the story. Whomever the story belongs to is generally the POV you use.

Why is a shifting POV problematic?
I’ll let you do a little research on this yourself. So many people have written about it. It’s called “head hopping.”

Here’s a starter from our friend Google: https://www.google.com/search?q=head+hopping&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

My recommendations? The Write Practice, Marcy Kennedy (she’s Canadian), the Editor’s Blog (Head-Hopping Gives Readers Whiplash), and The Write Editor (The Difference Between Omniscient POV and Head Hopping). Jami Gold and WriterUnboxed are awesome too.

Go ahead. Check them out. I’ll wait while you scan a few of the articles 🙂

In a visual medium, the POV is omniscient, or at most limited third simulated by a voice over. You can’t really “show” the inner thoughts and feelings of a character on screen. So in film, the POV is the camera’s and by extension, the director, producer, and/or editor may have a hand in influencing the final product.

There is such a thing as an omniscient POV in writing, and it used to be used, but it’s not really popular anymore. Further, it’s hard to do well.

In cinematic terms, omniscient translates to the page as a wide shot, interspersed with close ups on various characters, but it’s all external observation. Visually, you have the zoom or cut to give you a clue as to which character or characters are the focus of the scene.

In writing, you have to do something that simulates the zoom to cue the reader that the focus of the scene is now changing. Otherwise, you could end up confusing your reader (who’s talking now? why do I have to hear from this character? why is this important to the scene/story?).

Readers have changed over the last century. This is primarily due to movies and television (where a complete story is told in 30 minutes, an hour, or two hours), video games (complete action smorgasbord), and the internet (e.g. Twitter: describe your day in 140 characters anyone?). Flash fiction and micro fiction now have journals devoted to them. Books have been written in Tweets.

Readers like shorter forms of fiction because they can read a complete story in a limited period of time (think CommuterLit.com).

If the story isn’t short, then the author must continually hook the reader and keep them interested in the story. Part of this is engaging the reader in the story (what’s at stake?) and the character (why should I care?).

Omniscient POV requires readers to pay attention and do a little more work than they might otherwise be inclined to do. It’s not personal. You don’t stick with any one character long enough for the reader to become invested in that character and you’re observing like a camera, never delving into a character’s thoughts or feelings.

A limited third POV focuses intimately on one character: She ran to his side and thought, Is he dead? Oh, please, no.

Some writers, for example George R. R. Martin in Game of Thrones, shift between characters in the limited third POV, but you will find, generally, that an entire chapter will be from one character’s POV.

If an author changes POV characters in the middle of a chapter, the POV will change when the scene changes (therefore one POV per scene) and there will often be a visual cue such as an extra line between the paragraphs, or a symbol like # or * set off in the middle of its own line. Barbara Kyle, Canadian author of historical thrillers set in the Tudor era, uses this latter technique.

A lot of young adult fiction uses first person POV (I, me, my) because it sinks the reader immediately into the thoughts and feelings of the character. This can either cement the relationship (he’s just like me!) or alienate the reader (why won’t he stop whining?). Most first person narratives stick with one character through the entire story.

Then you have the experimental authors who will mix third and first person POVs. Deborah Harkness does this in A Discovery of Witches. Diana Gabaldon did it first, however, in her Outlander series. The protagonist is written in first person and all other POV characters are written in third.

Hardly anyone can write well in the second person POV (you look in the closet and find a boy huddling in the corner). It has been done, but it requires a deft hand and mind. If any form is going to use second person POV, it’s likely a short, flash, or micro fiction story.

This gets even more complicated when you add tenses to your POV. Past and present are the usual choices. I can’t think of a novel written in the future tense in any POV. Again shorter forms may take the pressure of future tense but it feels awkward to read no matter what.

For short fiction, I’d recommend figuring out whose story you’re telling and sticking with that character throughout. If you lose the reader, they’ll put your story down.

If that reader is an editor or a contest judge, your chances of publication may be shot.

I’m just saying 🙂


 

Was this post helpful to anyone else? Please let me know in the comments. Also, as I mentioned last week, if you have any burning writing questions, I’ll be happy to do my best to answer them. Or refer you to the experts who answer them better than I ever could 😀

And that’s a wrap for this weekend!

Muse-inks

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Jan 4-10, 2015

Another small package of good things for you.

The haunting world of 19th century asylums. Abandoned places are so inspirational. Brainpickings.

A couple purchased an abandoned 1700s French chateau and took pictures of what they found. Wimp.com

Do the spiral and cup carvings have something to do with astrology? Irish Central.

Check out these pictures of the 2015 ice and snow festival in Harbin, China. The Atlantic.

Scientific American delves into the reasons why we’re so intrigued by zombies.

After years of podcasting, Neil deGrasse Tyson is getting his own late night talk show. (YAY!) The Verge.

CNN presents a cool kind of horse racing.

A picture of another winter horse race shared by a friend. Panoramio.

When I was a kid, this was entertainment:

 

The Thin White Dude has always been a fashion icon. Esquire.

Get thoughty with it!

See you on the weekend 🙂

Thoughty Thursday

Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Jan 4-10, 2015

Good things come in little packages?

Publishers Weekly: The print book is making a comeback.

Why the self-published ebook is no longer the new query. Anne R. Allen.

K.M. Weiland’s most common writing mistakes series, part 37: Unnecessary filler.

In Katie’s Wednesday vlog, she talks about the one rule about backstory that matters.

Roz Morris and Peter Snell co-host “So you want to be a writer?” on Surrey Hills Radio. Listen to them all!

Canadian authors share their New Year’s resolutions. Canada Writes – CBC.

The 50 most anticipated books of the first half of 2015. The Globe and Mail.

David Bowie answers the Proust Questionnaire. Brainpickings.

Access Hollywood asks Sam Heughan and Catriona Balfe about the second half of Outlander, season one.

Check out these cool maps of fictional places from BookRiot.

Can we answer my first question, “yes”?

See you on Thoughty Thursday!

Tipsday

Passive voice avoidance strategies

A friend asked me if I had any posts about passive voice. Realizing that I didn’t, I answered her question and then put the post on my task list.

Interestingly enough, a day later, I was reading Victoria Mixon’s The Art & Craft of Fiction (yes, I read the second one first—sue me, or rather, don’t) and she wrote about the very topic 🙂

Before we get going, I just want to say that I meant to have this post up yesterday, but life intervened. A visit from some friends from out of town necessitated the cleaning of the house and shovelling of the drive. A sick mother required groceries. Not wanting to cook after cleaning, Phil and I went out to supper. And so the day disappeared. I got most of the post written yesterday, but not all of it.

Today, I need to get this post up, compile my curation posts for the week, and then I have to work some on the course I’m going to be facilitating at the beginning of February, return to revising IoS, and write a few more words in Marushka.

Nothing like having ambitious plans for what should be a day of rest 😉

Let’s start with passive sentence structure

Think of a relatively simple sentence.

The dog licked my ice cream.

Most likely, you thought of a sentence with a straightforward structure, as I did: Subject (noun) and predicate (verb and possibly object, or receiver of the action depicted by the verb).

Here is the same sentence written with a passive structure:

My ice cream was licked by the dog.

See what I did there?

A passive sentence switches the positions of the subject and object in the sentence and so the verb also has to change, generally, we have a “to be” verb and by. That’s how you recognize passive sentence structure: “to be” plus by.

Now, you may be thinking: I don’t write like that. I don’t try to write that way. Is this really an issue?

Well, some people want to sound more educated and awkward sentence structure sounds smart. Counterintuitive, but it’s kind of what we’ve been taught.

Academic texts and books from past centuries tend to use English that is a little different from what we speak and write commonly today. It sounds strange, awkward, but these writers are held up as authorities, paragons, or otherwise people-who-know-how-to-write.

So we learn (unconsciously) that strange or awkward means better. That’s where the tendency to passive structure can come from.

Also, in the work world, business writing may utilize passive structure to avoid sounding accusatory, or to distance the writer from an unpopular policy that the writer may not agree with but must nonetheless enforce.

You have to be critical about your thought process around phrasing. Both academic texts and classic literature are written in the way they are because they are serving a specific purpose, or because language changes over time. Business writing is all about rhetoric, purpose, and audience.

Using passive structure may have been acceptable at the time a particular book was written, and it may be required in academic or business contexts. It’s not wrong. It’s just not something you should do in the short story or novel you write today.

In fiction, you want to effectively simulate the way people speak.

An extension of passive structure included in “passive voice”

Passive structure is more clearly displayed in a sentence that has a predicate including an object. That’s where you see the “to be” plus by tell.

What if you don’t have an object in your sentence?

The dog ran.

Passive version:

The dog was running.

This is where you get the prohibition against “to be” verbs or progressive verb forms (-ing verbs) in general.

If you excise all “to be” verbs from your writing, you will find that you have a HUGE problem. Sometimes you need to use them.

With regard to progressive verb forms, don’t use them if a simpler version of the sentence can be written instead.

Zero words

Also roped into passive voice by some editors are words like “only” or “just,” or phrases like “began to,” “started to,” or “tried to.”

In general, “only” and “just” are called zero words. They can be removed from the sentence without changing the meaning of the sentence from which they’ve been removed. Try a simple Find exercise to remove these words from your text. It will be rare that you absolutely must have either of those two words.

The other group of phrases are symptoms of what I like to call the Yoda fallacy. In The Empire Strikes Back, Yoda says to Luke, “Do, or do not. There is no try.”

Like “just” and “only”, “tried to,” “started to,” or “began to” can often, though not all the time, be removed without changing the essential meaning of your sentence.

These words sap the energy from your sentences.

Other verb forms and contractions

If you write a passage describing past events, a flashback, chunk of backstory, or to convey essential events that don’t need the full scene treatment, you have to use the pluperfect verb form.

I had run.

Like the deadly “to be” verbs, the “had” of the pluperfect is vilified. Some people will tell you to eliminate every last one of them.

The thing is, they do serve a purpose, that of indicating that the events you write about using that verb form occurred in the past. This is especially important if you write in the past tense to begin with.

The solution? Contract those pluperfect hads.

I’d run.

It makes the “had” fade into the background. It sounds more natural when read silently in the head, too.

The same thing applies to the conditional verb forms.

Thus, “I would run” becomes “I’d run,” and “I would have run” becomes “I’d have run.”

People speak in contractions. It’s how we roll.

Basically, you squish more zero words out of your sentences.

What it comes down to

  • If you stick to a simple sentence structure where the subject comes first and is closely followed by its verb, you’ll be in good shape.
  • Avoid progressive verb forms (“to be” plus –ing).
  • Delete zero words.
  • Do or do not. There is no try (begin, or start).
  • Contract what makes sense to contract.

When editing, if you read your text out loud, you’ll be able to hear all of the above, potentially pacifying problems.

I really enjoyed writing this post. If you have any questions you’d like answered, please let me know. I’ll be happy to answer in post form 🙂

Have a good “end” everybody. Most of the weekend has already passed 😦

See you on Tipsday!

Muse-inks

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Dec 28, 2014-Jan 3, 2015

Peg Fitzpatrick shares Elizabeth Gilbert’s Happiness Jar project. Write the happiest moment of your day down and put it in the jar. It’s as simple as that.

The seven habits of happy people that they never talk about. Mind Body Green.

The age of loneliness is killing us. The Guardian.

WikiHow explains how to recognize a psychopath.

Back in September, just before DevLearn, Twist recorded a conversation with Neil deGrasse Tyson about science literacy and the future of work. Awesome stuff.

The eight books Neil believes everyone should read to understand the thinking that has historically driven western culture. Brainpickings.

Moar Neil, this time from the Business Insider: Why role models are overrated. It starts a playlist, but they’re all interesting videos . . .

<script height=”489px” width=”869px” src=”http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=6e12e8b3387a44daacfb73afba25a76e&ec=htdmxhcjqAOEwxNpr-FROB9dclEGM8OZ”></script&gt;

 

This article by Keith E. Stanovich for The Scientific American made me think about thinking. Metathinking? Anyway, it’s about dysrational thought and intelligence.

Thought we were more enlightened than this? I did too. Excellent reality check and novel fodder. i09.

Ten comics intended to shut down terrible arguments (but that might really only inflame the situation—please use with caution). i09.

These ten Futurama jokes will make you smarter. i09.

Another study confirms that ereaders disturb proper sleep patterns leading to various health complications. If you read anything before sleeping, make it a paper book. NPR.

The science of sleep: dreaming, depression, and how REM sleep regulates negative emotions. Brainpickings.

Why is NASA looking at your Christmas lights from space? Futurity.

We didn’t get to see this, but apparently there was a comet that could be seen with the naked (or binoculared) eye on New Year’s. The Christian Science Monitor.

There’s this star and it’s headed straight for our solar system. IFLS.

The Large Hadron Collider is coming back online at double the power to track down that tricky Higgs Boson and solve more of the mysteries of the universe. The Independent.

Archaeologists have unearthed a 6000 year old mega-temple built by a matriarchal society. World.Mic

These photographs of ancient trees are absolutely fabulous. BoredPanda.

Here are the top five National Geographic videos of 2014. Varied topics, but all fascinating.

People buy the strangest things. The Examiner.

An old-timey cover of Stay with me by Christina Gatti:

 

This guy casts his boxer puppy as Indiana Bones. Too kawaii for words. i09.

That’s your thoughty for the week.

See you Saturday!

Thoughty Thursday

Tipsday: Writerly Goodness found on the interwebz, Dec 28, 2014-Jan 3, 2015

K.M. Weiland’s last post and podcast of 2014! The difference between your story’s hook and your story’s heart.

Chuck Wendig’s 2015 publishing wishlist.

Here’s a podcast you may want to check out: Coode Street. The episode I’m sharing features Robert J. Sawyer and Peter Halasz having a heated, but friendly, discussion about Canadian Science Fiction.

The best science fiction and fantasy books of 2014. i09.

Brandon Sanderson explains why superheroes are so hard to get right. i09.

Western fairy tales given a Korean makeover. i09.

Arthur Kade interviews Sam Heughan and Catriona Balfe from last summer (in case you needed a little droughtlander viewing).

 

Neil Gaiman’s eight rules of writing on Brainpickings.

Margaret Atwood’s timeless advice for writers. The Huffington Post.

Our poet laureate is putting poetry on our transit 🙂 The Northern Life.

Opportunities for writers in January and February 2015. Aerogramme Writers’ Studio.

19 short story competitions from same.

Enjoy!

Tipsday

The one skill that can better your chances of career success

With a blog named Writerly Goodness, what skill do you think I’m talking about? That’s right: writing.

I have personal experience with this. My writing skills have consistently been one of the reasons I’ve been successful in internal assessment processes for advisor and consultant positions.

I’m happy to announce I’ve once again been “called up” as an acting consultant in business expertise. Yes, Mellie is once more BEC-a-licious 🙂 BEC-and-call girl? Aw, BEC it.

I’ll have much to report in the coming few months.

And my writing skills? Yup. Crucial to the promotion.

You don’t have to take my word for it, though. The good people at Grammarly, the world’s best grammar checker, surveyed over 400 freelancers to determine what impact writing skills have on a person’s career opportunities and published the results in an infographic (see below).

It has already been picked up by some websites, including The Huffington Post. Their goal is to raise awareness of the importance of good writing. Good writing is not only foundational to good communication, but it can also unlock knowledge, job opportunities, and access to education.

They’re also doing good work with Reading is Fundamental, a charity that promotes literacy.

So, have a gander:

Writing Skills Matter

Good night, my writerly peeps, and good grammar.

The Next Chapter: December 2014 update and a year in the writerly life

Janus has two heads so he can look back and ahead. Plus, you really can’t make meaningful progress unless you take some time to reflect on your accomplishments and understand where your journey has brought you to this point.

Let’s start with December, shall we?

In the wake of NaNoWriMo, I needed a wee respite from the purely creative writing. I kept up with my regular blog posts and caught up on a few things that happened in November that I had set aside posting about because of the aforementioned NaNo.

I returned to Marushka after a few days, though, because the force is strong in this one 😉 Also, I have to finish my shit (Wendigism).

Toward the end of the month, though, I wanted to get another short fiction submission revised and sent.

December 2014 writing progress

So at the end of the month, I’d written a total of 15,167 words, 8,812 of them on the blog, 6,234 on Marushka, and 121 on the short story.

What about 2014?

It was a good year, I think.

Since it was the first year I tracked my writerly output, I really have nothing to compare it to, but I know I’ve written more words in this year than I did in 2013 or any year before that.

The highlights:

“The Broken Places” was published in Bastion Science Fiction Magazine in its June issue.

“On the Ferry” won second place in the In Places Between contest.

“Downtime” will be in the fall 2014 issue of On Spec Magazine. The issue hasn’t come out yet (long story short—please subscribe or support them on their Patreon page), but I’m still pleased as punch.

I have writerly income to report on my tax return for the second year in a row!

I’ve put “The Broken Places” and “Downtime” in the short story category in the Auroras. It’s my first year doing this kind of thing, so we’ll see how it goes.

Overall, I submitted six short stories for publication. This is fewer than in past years, but given my greater focus on my larger projects, I’m happy with this.

I attended Ad Astra, CanWrite!, and When Words Collide conferences, and workshops by Brian Henry and The Humber School for Writers.

In 2014, I have written:

  • 110,361 words on this blog
  • 34,589 words on Marushka
  • 21,464 words on Gerod and the Lions
  • 3,521 words of short fiction
  • 3,161 words on Apprentice of Wind
  • 2,384 words on Figments
  • Total: 175,480

2014 Summary

That’s a fuckload of words. Sorry. I felt the profanity appropriate.

Plus, I mapped out and reverse engineered both IoS and Figments, and revised some of IoS.

I am still eternally grateful to Jamie Raintree for her wonderful Excel spreadsheet. This year’s has enough project slots that I don’t have to modify it 🙂 Also, it appears to have a way to track drafting and revisions. I’m excited to see how it works out.

For the second year in a row, the most popular posts on my blog have been those I wrote back in 2012. Dress for Success has been consistently popular. I didn’t think a post about writing in my pyjamas would have been so compelling. Go figure.

Eight Metaphors for Persistence . . . is also a heavily viewed post. I appreciate that a bit more because it was the first post on this iteration of the blog and spoke to how I picked up the pieces after being hacked.

Still, I would like to see some of my book reviews, or conference reportage posts, rank higher.

My overall views on the blog went down from last year. In 2013 I filled the Sydney Opera House five times. In 2014 I only filled it four times.

I take all this with a grain of salt, however, as the number of my followers through WordPress has only grown and at 373, I’m closing in on 400 followers. That’s not bad for three years of blogging when I don’t have a book to sell.

Those who receive my posts via email, or who can read them through WordPress may not be counted because they haven’t actually visited the site.

Personally, as long as you’re enjoying what you read, I’m good. I’m a fan of the slow build.

What’s ahead for 2015?

I’ve you’ve read me for any length of time, you’ll know I don’t go in for resolutions. I set goals and manage my projects on an ongoing basis, sometimes re-evaluating and adjusting my goals to account for the dreaded scope creep 🙂

That’s all stuff I learned from the project management I have to do for work. It’s also similar to the dreaded underwear creep (damnit, not another wedgie).

In all seriousness, I intend to revise and submit several more short stories throughout the year. I also intend to write a few new ones.

I intend to finish my first drafts of Marushka (goal length approximately 76,000 words) and GatL (goal length approximately 50,000 words). I can manage this at a pace of about 5,000 words a month. I’ll finish Marushka first, because it’s where my head is at the moment, and then return to work on GatL afterward.

I will revise IoS and finally (FINALLY) start querying. This is so long overdue, I can’t even. Can’t. Even.

I will move onto revisions of Figments once I start querying IoS.

I will map and reverse engineer AoW and probably Marushka.

I don’t think I’ll be able to manage much more than that for the bulk of the year.

I will again engage in the NaNoWriMo Challenge, even though I will be working through the month of November. I was very pleased with the 2014 results, even though it wasn’t a “win,” per se.

For financial reasons, I’m going to stay close to home this year with conferences and conventions. Most likely Ad Astra and Can-Con.

My big expense, professional development-wise, will be a writing retreat in the summer (if I can swing the leave from work—summer’s a peak time and it’s always a big deal), also local.

I’m facilitating my first writing workshop in years in February. You know I’ll be blogging that one 🙂

And the rest will be based on opportunities as they come my way.

I like preparing my Tipsday and Thoughty Thursday curation posts on the weekend for easier distribution (and more writing time) through the week.

Aside from that, the bloggage will come out of my writerly life, as it usually does.

I have one more post to go before the night is over.

See you shortly 🙂

The Next Chapter

Thoughty Thursday: Things that made me go hmmmm on the interwebz, Dec 21-27, 2014

Sixteen tips for dealing with seasonal affective disorder (SAD). The Toast.

Anna Maria Tremonti of CBC’s The Current interviews psychologist Brian Little about personality types.

The elusive art of inner wholeness. Parker Palmer on Brainpickings.

Wendell Barry on solitude and why pride and despair are the two great enemies of creativity. Brainpickings.

The power of applied physics. i09.

Crows understand analogies. So much for calling someone a bird brain 😉 IFLS.

How to find faster than light particles. IFLS.

Say hello to our new galactic neighbour. IFLS.

The dominant life form in the cosmos is probably superintelligent robots. Really? Motherboard.

American management explained. Tickld.

25 of the most creative sculptures you’ll ever see. EarthPorm.com

25 wild parenting moments from EarthPorm.com.

Looking back at Christmas with a couple of videos.

The Pogues:

 

And your Christmas kawaii:

 

It may be January first, but Janus looks back as well as forwards 😉

Have a great rest of the week, y’all!

Thoughty Thursday