tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-69530731974952262442024-03-05T18:58:32.865-08:00J. P. GreeneShifting FabricsJ. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-41917250776230355352012-09-27T23:47:00.000-07:002012-09-27T23:48:38.873-07:00Cthulhu and the CraziesI love Lovecraftian horror.<br />
<br />
(That's a really awkward thing to write. I went back and forth on it a few times, but "I like Lovecraftian horror" was just too weak.)<br />
<br />
They're great, though. I mean, Lovecraft is pretty much the go-to on that, obviously. (It's got his name right in the genre!) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_the_Mountains_of_Madness">At the Mountains of Madness</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_Cthulhu">The Call of Cthulhu</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shadow_Over_Innsmouth">The Shadow Over Innsmouth</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dunwich_Horror">The Dunwich Horror</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickman%27s_Model">Pickman's Model</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shadow_Out_of_Time">The Shadow out of Time</a> are all really amazing stories about the unknown. With the partial exception of The Dunwich Horror, they all tell stories of an unfathomable universe of which humanity is a completely insignificant part. We have no chance to fight back. We cannot hope to defend against the alien things that exist alongside us. We cannot hope to even understand them. They are as beyond us as we are beyond ants.<br />
<br />
There's one recurring element to Lovecraftian fiction that always jolts my suspension of disbelief, just a little. The slightest thing out of the ordinary will drive everyone <i>completely insane</i>.<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>I mean, I <i>understand</i> that it would be a huge mental trauma to find out that humans aren't actually the superior species. I understand that it would be horrifying to find out that we were barely sentient at all, compared to the great minds moving about just below us. I could easily see horrible depression coming out of that, a growing self-hatred as the knowledge that <i>you simply do not matter</i> hits home.<br />
<br />
As opposed to what we generally find: "Humans aren't the masters of the Earth; there are entities older than our entire race... BETTER TEAR OUT MY EYES!"<br />
<br />
Now, to be fair, I have an unfair advantage over Lovecraft's characters. I've read about and watched countless encounters between humanity and Elder Beings from Beyond The Stars. Sure, most of the time, the plucky humans manage to find a way to overcome the god-things anyway, but it's <i>very</i> common for the situation to start off with everyone thinking that the humans are insignificant, barely sentient insects. And sometimes that even stays the case, especially with written fiction (it's probably hard to make a TV show where it turns out humans really are worthless, after all). The people in Lovecraft's books don't have the toolset I have for dealing with that concept.<br />
<br />
So I'll excuse a lot of instant, just-add-water insanity in Lovecraft's own writing. In addition to the above, Lovecraft was dealing with a very early concept of psychology, as well. It's hard to hold it against him when I don't find his early-1900s pop psychology that convincing. But modern writers just don't have that excuse.<br />
<br />
If you're going to write a story that includes people "going mad" because of close encounters with an eldritch horror, you had better <i>really</i> make that believable. That horror has <i>got</i> to be described in a way that, when I read it, makes me think, "Oh ok, yeah. I could see that driving someone crazy."<br />
<br />
If I read a story that takes place in the 2000s, and a character is driven to schizophrenia because he discovered that mankind is merely a side effect of an ancient experiment, then I'm probably not going to buy it. Why would that drive him insane? "Because it's horrifying" is just not a good enough answer. Not anymore.<br />
<br />
And after nearly 80 years, you can't claim it's an homage to Lovecraft, either. Well, you can claim it, but I'm still not going to believe the story.<br />
<br />
(My favorite Lovecraft story is actually very different from any of the "unknown abomination" stuff he's most known for. <a href="http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/o.asp">The Outsider</a> is one of the best short stories I think I've ever read. You should go read it, now.)J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-60739695241838558662012-09-23T05:04:00.000-07:002012-09-23T05:05:10.090-07:00When to Give Up (For Now)I've read a lot of advice telling aspiring writers to never give up on a story. I understand this advice, and generally it's pretty good. It's easy to get bored while writing something, especially if it's a long work like a novel. No matter how awesome your idea is, no matter how exciting your plot is, after awhile you're just going to get bored and want to do something else.<br />
<br />
Ideas don't stop coming just because you're writing. Hell, if anything, ideas come <i>faster</i> when you're writing. It's extremely easy to lose track of what you're working on, simply because it's less interesting than the great new idea you just had.<br />
<br />
Of course, the story you're working on was a great new idea last week, wasn't it? When you first had it? The idea just popped into your head, and you fell in absolute love with it. Maybe you even stopped writing what you were working on at the time to give this great new idea the attention it deserved! But now that you're a few days into writing it (or a few weeks, or a few months), you've started to run head-on into the part that's called "hard work." That part's not as exciting.<br />
<br />
This brand new idea, though, wow! You can already tell that one will just flow right out of you! You'll probably be able to bang out a first draft in a day!<br />
<br />
Is that possible? Enh. Technically. <br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a>It's more possible that you're going to end up doing this for fifteen stories in a row, leaving each one half-finished as you move on to what you know will <i>really</i> be good, this time.<br />
<br />
Failure to stick with a story just because it's become a slog is probably one of the biggest reasons people fail to write at all. I've done that. I've done that a <i>lot</i>. <br />
<br />
<br />
So now how am I going to say that I disagree with the statement "never give up?" Well, it's a qualified disagreement. Let me give the example of a crime story I've been working on for the past month and a half. For some reason, the story just won't work. I don't know exactly why, either. I've got the ending written, and the beginning. I've got most of the middle done. But there's a heist right at the center of the story that I, apparently, <i>cannot write</i>. Not right now, at least. I've spend the last three weeks on this story, trying to write this thing, and I can't do it.<br />
<br />
That's a signal, I think. I like this story, and I need to come back to it later. But for right now, it's doing nothing but keeping me from working. There's only so many times I can sit down, look at the same story, and fail, before I just start to hate myself.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, I've had another idea (or six) dancing around in my head this whole time. So tonight I actually <i>did</i> manage to bang out most of a first draft of one of those stories. After I finish this one, I'll come back to the heist and see if anything any clearer. A fresh mind can do a lot to get past a roadblock.<br />
<br />
<br />J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-69812829148040629062010-12-07T16:25:00.001-08:002011-01-24T01:58:11.173-08:00The Rewrite - Part 1So, NaNoWriMo is over, and I've got some stories I think have potential, and others that don't. All in all, I've got about a half dozen short stories. <br />
<br />
Well, I have a half dozen first drafts. That's <i>significantly</i> different than having a half dozen completed stories. So now what do I do? <br />
<br />
I rewrite.<br />
<br />
The first law of first drafts is that first drafts <i>suck</i>. Some people write better first drafts than others, true. I'm sure there are some lucky people out there who write first drafts that are even worthwhile. Those people are proof that God loves some folks more than others and allows them to break the rules. If you're one of those, then I am deeply honored by your reading of this. You are very sparkly. Can I rub myself on you? <br />
<br />
We mortals have to rewrite. Revise. Edit. <br />
<br />
In that order.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Rewriting and rewriting are sometimes described as much the same thing, but I'm choosing to separate the two. Even editing is sometimes conflated with the other two, but that's just plain wrong. <br />
I've listed these in order, from most general to most specific. Rewriting involves the largest changes, such as the removal or addition of characters, plotlines, and settings. The point of view might change from the hero to the villain. Perhaps the story is good, but it would be better if it happened on the moon. As you can probably guess, this process often lives up to its name. Rewriting often changes the very plot of a story.<br />
<br />
Revising is more specific. This paragraph would look better here. Maybe I shouldn't quote John's thoughts during the battle; would it be better to simply describe them? Maybe the story needs more explanation about the origin of the alien slavers, and Penelope needs to find an old journal that describes the aliens' arrival. Revising doesn't change the plot itself, generally, but it does involve changing the structure. Revising makes the story read better.<br />
<br />
Editing is the most specific. Quixoctic isn't spelled right. Wait, that word's kind of pretentious. Is it even the word I want to use, or would another be better? Does this sentence sound right, or do I need to rewrite it? Why do half of the sentences in this scene start with the word, "Well?" Many of these issues (or at least the most hideous ones) will be found and taken care of in the earlier stages of the process, but I guarantee that some will survive. <br />
<br />
As I hope I can make clear, it's counterproductive to edit before you revise, or to revise before you edit. Doing otherwise is a waste of time. You might spend an hour going over a particularly sticky scene, wrestling with descriptions of actions that are simply hard to describe. Later, you realize that scene was unnecessary entirely, and in the interest of writing a good story, you delete the whole chunk. What good did the editing do you? Sure, you got some practice editing, but believe me . . . you'll get enough of that.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-37751396191590174152010-11-29T18:57:00.001-08:002010-11-29T19:00:08.949-08:00NaNo Complete<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">NaNo Count: 50,359</a><br />
<br />
Well, that was a close call. After all my confidence the other day, I went and had a family emergency.<br />
<br />
Let's just say the last few thousand words are <i>very poor</i>, and leave it at that.<br />
<br />
Well, that was fun. And a <i>lot</i> harder than I expected. Which is even more annoying, considering that I expected it to be quite difficult! This next month will mostly be editing, though I hope to finish at least two new stories as well. I think it's important to keep writing even when you're doing other things related to said writing. Spending an entire month doing nothing but editing does get a lot of editing done, but it gets pretty much no writing done. Since writing's the hardest part, well then, it's fairly obvious what needs to be practiced most. <br />
<br />
One day, writing will not be hard at all. And then I will be a god.*<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">* It's important to keep your goals humble and realistic. There's a reason I didn't capitalize that "g."</span>J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-55026332508651704512010-11-28T01:04:00.001-08:002010-11-28T01:15:05.825-08:00NaNoWriMo Update<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">NaNo count: 47,530</a><br />
<br />
I'm definitely going to make it, which is nice. Granted, I've only attempted once before, but still. It's nice to know I can accomplish something like this if I really press myself on it. <br />
<br />
I completed my story about the enhanced US agent fighting monsters in Chicago. I've also done the following concepts:<br />
<br />
<hr />A man who lived his entire life on a small space station scrambles to fix it, as more and more things go wrong. As the story progresses, the reader finds out why he's the only one there.<br />
<hr />A man has experience in dealing with minor magics here and there, and one day sees a fairy in the woods. He becomes obsessed with finding her again, finding out who he is, to the detriment of his family and village.<b> </b><br />
<hr />A knight on a great quest is gravely wounded, but healed by a beautiful forest spirit. As time goes on, he becomes so obsessed with the spirit that he abandons his great quest.<br />
<hr />An elf girl, trained to bring in the spring with a ritual dance, is barred from it as she has committed anathema. She struggles to complete the ritual anyway, for the sake of her tribe.<br />
<hr /><br />
I do recognize that two of those stories are quite similar. It's almost as if I finished one story, then realized it worked a lot better if I changed all the characters and the setting. Imagine that.<br />
<br />
Right now I'm working on this one: A scientist who runs mice through mazes begins to lose his mind, thinking that he's in a maze, himself.<br />
<br />
Overall, I'm satisfied with how the month has gone. I could have done more, but there's no reason to focus on that kind of thing. I am proud of several of these stories, and after a good bit of rewriting, hope to start submitting them soon.<br />
<br />
Next month, expect plenty of posts about editing and revising! (That's the most fun part, right?)J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-26719992530732936062010-11-21T00:36:00.000-08:002010-11-21T00:41:26.312-08:00Bret Maverick is Mat Cauthon<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUSX50G2hOXM6zM9ej8ayxGBPIUqyZ9fgfWA5iOrIDFervKS84JYTaTA9wkRnqwEl9AiNt9wAVUwsWIGXnxr_gNFvEq9U9nXWK0rAD-iwU7y-583FvE5pjQ9WBZ1B9CgrnfSjmuuNad-xs/s1600/mat+maverick.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="230" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgUSX50G2hOXM6zM9ej8ayxGBPIUqyZ9fgfWA5iOrIDFervKS84JYTaTA9wkRnqwEl9AiNt9wAVUwsWIGXnxr_gNFvEq9U9nXWK0rAD-iwU7y-583FvE5pjQ9WBZ1B9CgrnfSjmuuNad-xs/s400/mat+maverick.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />
I was watching <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maverick_%28film%29">Maverick</a> tonight and had a realization. Specifically, that realization that I went ahead and titled this post with: there is no significant difference between Bret Maverick and <a href="http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Matrim_Cauthon">Matrim Cauthon</a>.<br />
<br />
They're both gamblers. They're both exceptionally good fighters. Considering that they spend quite a bit of time fighting for their lives, they certainly like fine clothing. Maverick imports his silk shirts in all the way from Paris, for crying out loud! And most importantly, they're both the luckiest people alive. Maverick doesn't even need to look at his cards to know he's going to win.<br />
<br />
I just thought I'd throw that out there.<br />
<br />
And yes, I know that there's a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maverick_%28TV_series%29">TV show</a>. But I've never seen any of that, so I'm going by the movie.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-66093800142024025602010-11-18T18:18:00.001-08:002010-11-18T18:18:37.628-08:00Villains - Part 2Do all stories need a villain?<br />
<br />
Well, no.<br />
<br />
Sure, almost any story needs an antagonist, but that antagonist doesn't need to be a person. Since we are talking about speculative fiction, I should add that by "person" I do not necessarily mean "human." A villain can be an alien, a robot, a fairy, a sentient stone, a god, <i>God</i>, or an evil book. However, to be a villain, the antagonist does need to have at least the <i>potential</i> for personality.<br />
<br />
Whether the villain has personality or not depends on how well you write him. In <a href="http://www.jpgreene.net/2010/09/villains.html">my last post on villains</a>, I talked about this, why it's important that a villain be relatable. In this post, I'll talk about how a villain-driven conflict differs from others.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
First, let's fall back into high school English class and talk about conflict. According to literature books everywhere, there are seven basic types of conflict: Man against Man, Man against Nature, Man against Self, Man against God, Man against Society, Man against Technology, and Man against the Supernatural.<br />
<br />
I'd like to simplify that list a bit, even though it's already a simplification. Man against God, Man against Society, and Man against Technology could all potentially fall under "Man against Nature." In these conflicts, the protagonist is fighting against the overarching way of things. Whether that be the elements of the wild, the pressures of the human world, the unthinking repetition of machinery, or the will of Heaven, the protagonist has to strive against a vast, unindividualized enemy. The enemy does not recognize the character as an enemy; indeed, it does not even set itself against him. Rather, the enemy simply <i>exists</i>, and by that existence, causes conflict for the protagonist. <br />
<br />
Similarly, Man against the Supernatural is not significantly different from "Man against Man." If the enemy be a ghost, a vengeful angel, or an evil fairy, there is a single, individuated enemy. It likely knows the protagonists name, or at the very least will learn to hate that name by the end of the story. The enemy has its own sense of self, its own sense of personality, and could easily have a section of the book written from its point of view. If the technology in "Man against Technology" was a robot, or an AI within the realm of human understanding, then it would fall under this conflict. Similarly, if God himself took a personal interest in the protagonist and set himself up as an enemy, then too would that conflict fall here.<br />
<br />
So we have three basic conflicts left. I'll even make them politically correct, since I'm already changing things around: Individual against Individual (IvI), Individual against Self (IvS), and Individual against Nature (IvN). <br />
<br />
Only one of these conflicts can contain a villain, and that is IvI.<br />
<br />
You might think that recognizing a conflict as IvI would be easy, but we're working in speculative fiction, and we love screwing around with straight lines. A good way to tell if a conflict is IvI is to ask a simple question: Could I write a POV from the antagonist's point of view? If so, then you've got yourself an IvI conflict, and you've got yourself a villain. If not, then you're working in another conflict, and you aren't really dealing with the concept of a villain at all.<br />
<br />
Sometimes these lines become blurred. Take <i>The Briar King</i>, by Gregory Keyes. The eponymous creature could definitely be described as an antagonist. Certainly the Briar King creates all sorts of trouble for a few of the characters of that book. But could any reasonable POV be written from the Briar King? Not really. He's just . . . there. He exists, and as such, he creates conflict for those characters. That would be an IvN plot, and the Briar King is therefore not a true villain. <br />
<br />
The inner system AI's from Charles Stross's <i>Accelerando</i> are not villains either, really. Their existence comes just short of being anathema to the humans living in the outer system, but there would be no way to write anything meaningful from their POV. They are vast, unknowable gods. There is no way to comprehend them, let alone engage in anything that could be called Man versus Man, or Individual versus Individual.<br />
<br />
Robert Jordon's Dark One in <i>The Wheel of Time</i> comes close to losing his status as a villain, as well. While we do have evidence that the Dark One has a personality, and occasionally we actually hear him speak, there is little doubt that we are encountering an evil god. The Dark One is not simply a superpowered, evil person, he is something beyond our ken. <br />
<br />
Let's go back to high school for a non-sf example. Jack London's "To Build a Fire" has no villain. The conflict is IvN at its most pure. (If you have not read this, you should. It has to be available online somewhere.) Could a POV have been written for the cold, for the snow? No. At least not in any reasonable fashion. Nature, like the Dark One, like the Briar King, is not a villain. <br />
<br />
Yes, none of these stories required a villain for their conflict. There could be a perfectly workable plot without one. However, almost all of these examples would be strengthened by the addition of a villain. While the Dark One provides us a certain ineffable terror, we cannot <i>hate</i> him. Not personally. How can we? Might as well hate the drought for thirsting us to death, or the cold for killing our crops. (Yes, I recognize that people hate such things, but there's a difference. You may hate the winter for causing the ice that made the car skid out of control and killed your grandmother, but it is not the same as the hatred you would have for the person who drove her off the road purposefully, or even by accident!)<br />
<br />
Without villains, the stories would still work. But would they be as interesting? In most cases, probably not. Readers want an enemy that they can relate to. They want a chance to see the protagonist standing triumphantly above the villain. They want to see the villain realize his mistake, all too late. These things are impossible with an IvN conflict. <br />
<br />
The authors I referenced realized this as well, and wrote accordingly. <i>The Wheel of Time</i> has the Forsaken. Though subservient to the Dark One, they are much more <i>human</i>. They can be hated. <i>Accelerando</i> had multiple villains, various little IvI's throughout the larger IvN of the novel. <i>The Briar King</i> also had human villains, or at least human-like ones. They keep the characters busy, and distract them from their primary task of surviving the harsh realities of nature.<br />
<br />
Yes, "To Build a Fire" had no villain, and it's a classic. But Jack London is one of the best IvN writers there has ever been, and even then he rarely eschewed IvI completely.<br />
<br />
In the end, don't worry if your primary antagonist is something other than a person/evil spirit/robot/transdimensional death-flower. But if it's a anything more than a short, it's probably a good idea to throw a villain in there as well. The villain doesn't have to supply the main conflict, but his presence will definitely liven things up.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-83543735754974532202010-11-14T20:22:00.001-08:002010-11-14T20:23:19.808-08:00Productive weekend is productiveOk, so it was more of a productive super-weekend. Since I'm a government employee (trust me, the most boring kind of government employee imaginable) I got Veteran's Day off, and I took Friday off as a vacation because . . . who wants to go back to work for a day after having a day off? Over this magnificent four-day weekend, I managed to write over 12,000 words! I'm fairly proud of that. I started and completely finished two separate stories. The first was the story I mentioned in my <a href="http://www.jpgreene.net/2010/11/books-i-am-reading-nano-update-and-also.html">last post</a>, about a woman who must survive without her magic for fear of harming her child. I also wrote a fairly short story (2,700 words) about a poor, abused woman who fully believes that she is the one who must be doing something wrong. When the stars talk to her, they tell her a different story.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">Nano Count: 22,698</a><br />
<br />
The next story: In the late 21st century, an agent of the United States government uses his technological enhancements to save Chicago from a military bio-monster.<br />
<br />
I have not written a good post about the actual art of writing in several weeks, and plan to rectify that situation soon. Expect part two of my <a href="http://www.jpgreene.net/2010/09/villains.html">Villains post</a> later this week.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-49956370561565635392010-11-09T17:52:00.001-08:002010-11-09T19:16:42.651-08:00Books I am reading, NaNo update, and also a new keyboard!I've decided to <a href="http://www.jpgreene.net/p/books-im-reading.html">add a page</a> to this blog that lists the books that I'm currently reading, and those I have read. (This will <i>not</i> be retroactive. I'm not even going to try to do something like that.) I will probably mention what I'm reading on the main blog as well, but I'll be able to keep a record this way.<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
I just finished <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Towers-Midnight-Wheel-Robert-Jordan/dp/0765325942/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289352882&sr=1-1">Towers of Midnight</a></i>, and that was awesome. I am currently reading <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Gardens-Sun-Paul-McAuley/dp/1616141964">Gardens of the Sun</a></i>, by Paul McAuley, as well as <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Brass-Man-Ian-Cormac-Book/dp/0765317311/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1289352826&sr=1-1">Brass Man</a></i>, by Neal Asher. <i>Gardens of the Sun</i> is a very good book, the second in a series that deals with the colonization of the solar system. It is quite political, and could easily be described as a fairly slow read. The politics are interesting, however, and are fairly realistic. I recommend it. <i>Brass Man</i> is the third book in Asher's Ian Cormac series. It takes place significantly farther in the future than McAuley's books do, and is much faster paced. To those who enjoy books with lots of gun fights and explosions, it's hard not to recommend this series.<br />
<br />
I totally fell off the NaNo wagon this weekend, what with the new Wheel of Time book and all. I slammed out a nice 3,500 words today, though, and have no worries about hitting 50k by month's end. I finished my first short today, and will now write the second. Today's concept: A woman hides from an invading army, unwilling to use her magic to defend for fear of harming her unborn child.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">Nano Count: 11,389</a><br />
<br />
I got a new keyboard! My old one was getting old and, to be honest, senile. Keys wouldn't press when they were supposed to, sometimes they <i>would</i> press when they <i>weren't</i> supposed to, and generally everything was just acting all caddly-wompus. After doing far more research on keyboards than you would think would be possible, I decided on a <a href="http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16823201040">Rosewill RK-9000</a>. <br />
<br />
Looking at that link now, I see that it's no longer for sale. Considering that Rosewill is actually Newegg's house brand, that makes me wonder if it's available at all, anywhere. At the time this was written, at least, the listing actually says "Deactivated." Not "Out of Stock," but "Deactivated." That's sad, because this is the best keyboard I think I have ever used. It's fully mechanical, uses Cherry blue switches for each key, and is <i>clicky</i>. I forgot how much I love a clicky keyboard. <br />
<br />
I swear that the clicks help me write. They speak to me. They whisper new plots in my ears.<br />
<br />
Anyway, this is easily the equal of more expensive brands like Das or Filco, and it was less than half the price. I guess I was just lucky. <br />
<br />
Well, you don't hear me arguing.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-6159554877332892072010-11-02T16:15:00.000-07:002010-11-21T00:41:12.921-08:00Damn you, Brandon Sanderson!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1RSVT7sdm8WdgkmFih7dtjnaUhkwop04_vHB583fnBI1fJZ1tmKqFWLC65QOH7GbX70WV6B6JpHNv7jbgRidksZRcw_tYbHZ1EagoQ7cXaD6Kn0Fmm7NGcSOPIBOPqMJatH8Cz6FTJNCA/s1600/IMAG0108.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1RSVT7sdm8WdgkmFih7dtjnaUhkwop04_vHB583fnBI1fJZ1tmKqFWLC65QOH7GbX70WV6B6JpHNv7jbgRidksZRcw_tYbHZ1EagoQ7cXaD6Kn0Fmm7NGcSOPIBOPqMJatH8Cz6FTJNCA/s320/IMAG0108.jpg" width="224" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVvDvVOtwOdD-Fvb_dLoXnirIHLTzCcc0cLg1x8OrqJCjzmp4Pkm8SEx8I5WqNUScXSmeWMORUHbECF284oEV0-5Nw7omLPousyKATMM1fSGALFYXzfWmy7fX2SC9b0cOAqf8K21EOSu9T/s1600/IMAG0108.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br />
</a></div>I'm really not sure how anyone expects me to write when Sanderson keeps publishing books every few months. What? He doesn't? Well, it seems that way to me. From now on, I'm calling him Captain Insano.<br />
<br />
Why? No reason. I just like the idea.<br />
<br />
This might make NaNo harder, but it'll also drive home an important lesson: <i>to write, you must read</i>. I've seen author after author say this, though a quick Google only turns up <a href="http://www.nicholassparks.com/ForWriters.asp?PageID=1">Nicholas Sparks</a> (which is funny, cause I've actually never read him). It sounds like you're just piling another difficulty on top of what's already a difficult process, but it's important.<br />
<br />
Seriously, it helps. Even the little experience I have has taught me that. Words fall out of my head much easier when I've been reading a lot, lately. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">NaNo Count: 3,656</a>J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-46250991490596346012010-11-01T16:35:00.001-07:002010-11-02T16:17:38.119-07:00Day 1 - NaNo<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">NaNo Count: 1,739 </a><br />
<br />
As I mentioned earlier, I'm writing several different stories for this year's NaNoWriMo. This morning I looked at a list of several ideas I've had and chose the one that seemed most interesting at the moment. When I finish that story, I'll go back to the list and pick another. <br />
<br />
The one I chose for today was this: <i>A man fights back against his former slavers. He was in shackles for so long that even now, years later, his wrists feel naked and wrong to him.</i> <br />
<br />
So far the story is going well. I'm already looking forward to cleaning it up, next month! That's always a good sign.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-46848969631011729722010-10-31T20:47:00.001-07:002010-10-31T21:04:50.617-07:00NaNoWriMoSo it's been awhile.<br />
<br />
So Starcraft 2 is like a black hole of free time. For the last month or so, my life has been pretty much devoured by it. I've written nothing. No stories, no outlines, no blog posts . . . I've barely written any emails. My friends should count themselves lucky I even deigned to talk to them.<br />
<br />
You should <i>definitely</i> take that as an endorsement of the game. I expect my large check in the mail any day now, Blizzard. <br />
<br />
<i>Large.</i><br />
<br />
Anyway, it's time for me to hop back on the horse and be a little more responsible. Now is a good day to make that decision, as <a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/">NaNoWriMo</a> starts tomorrow. I'm excited about it, and plan on winning this time. (Winning involves writing the requisite 50,000 words during November and is entirely self-governed. Anyone can claim to have won and submit 50,000 words of gibberish, but what's the fun in that?) I am tweaking the rules a bit, though.<br />
<br />
The standard idea is to write 50,000 words of a novel, hence the name: <b>Na</b>tional <b>No</b>vel <b>Wri</b>ting <b>Mo</b>nth. I will still write 50,000 words, but I will write stories instead of a novel. I would rather end the month with five to ten stories instead of a single partial novel. It stays within the spirit of the thing, I think, and I'll feel more accomplished. <br />
<br />
I brainstormed today with a friend, and came up with several concepts for potential stories. Tomorrow morning I will choose one, and I will start writing until I finish it. Then I will choose another, and so on and so forth.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/547776">Here's my profile</a>, if anyone wants to follow my progress for some reason.<br />
<br />
The most important thing about something like this is to remember to have fun, and not stress. The idea isn't to burn yourself out so much you don't write at all for another year; it's to push yourself. <br />
<br />
So let's push ourselves.<br />
<br />
Edit: Wow, the Nano site is being HAMMERED tonight. Hopefully that's a good sign. I love to see people writing.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-16380167191197917532010-09-22T14:34:00.000-07:002010-11-18T18:18:06.515-08:00Villains - Part 1(I wrote this, then realized it would probably be the first of an eventual series on villains. Here goes.)<br />
<br />
Everyone loves good villains. They can be fun -- or horrifying -- but one thing good villains always are is <i>memorable</i>. It’s easy to write poor villains, as well. How can you tell the difference?<br />
<br />
In high school, when I started writing fantasy, I always paid special attention to the bad guy scenes. Several years ago I found copies of several things I had written back then and went over them. While most of it was quite horrible, the scenes where the bad guy was doing something cool were fairly well written! I was retroactively proud of myself. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
Don’t get me wrong, I wasn’t writing anything that any sane person would call worthwhile. The villains were extraordinarily cliché. One had stone gray skin, smooth, hairless, and unbroken. As he broke forth from the rocky ground, powerful arms cracking and boulders the size of horses, seers and witchwomen thousands of miles away cried out in prophetic horror. Another wore a deep red velvet cloak that hid all but his face completely from view. His eyes shown an eldritch red, the effects of his looking first-hand into the Far Abyss itself. <br />
<br />
Neither of these would be entirely unusable as a villain now, regardless of the cliché. And the scenes weren’t written that poorly, either. (Though <a href="http://www.jpgreene.net/2010/09/direction-of-writing.html">as I mentioned in a previous post</a>, this was likely because of how cool these scenes were, so they were naturally easy to write.) They don’t really seem that memorable, though. Why do you think this is so?<br />
<br />
The problem is, neither of these villains have much personality. The gray giant was an ancient evil, powerful by nature, and was driven to destroy and conquer because that was his nature. He was subjugation, the incarnation of ancient dark magics, and he would conquer. He could only be stopped by brute force: armies and magic stronger than the ones he could raise. A <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin">macguffin </a>would likely be needed to defeat him. The cloaked man was once mortal, or might even still be. He was the quintessential power-hungry mage. He had tasted power, and he would not rest until he had all of it. Nothing, not morals nor even the desire to keep himself human, would stop him. A macguffin would still be useful here, but it might also be possible for the villain to come into sudden doubt near the climax of his plan, a hesitation which would cost him his life. (This doubt would, of course, be planted by the sheer goodness and selflishness of the hero.)<br />
<br />
The best villains are usually ones that evoke strong emotions in the reader. Often, the story will try to make the reader loathe the villain. The evil king who delights in torture (extra points if you make him fat), the dark lord who watches in satisfaction as his whispers slowly tear the skin off the hero’s loved ones – these make the reader long for the villain to be destroyed. They root for the hero not simply because they want the good guys to win, but they also specifically <i>want the bad guys to lose</i>.<br />
<br />
Other times, the writer wishes to create sympathy, or even empathy for the villain.* I think this creates a stronger character than simply making him despicable. Perhaps he is a powerful general who has come to hate war, and believes that once he has conquered the world, there will finally be peace. Perhaps an ex-priest who now detests God, and all he stands for, because of the horrible things that the church has forced him to do. You can go darker than that, easily, but I could list examples for another thousand words. That’s not what this post is about.<br />
<br />
The main point here is that the readers really need to care about the villain. If you can make them love the bad guy, that’s great! It’s often good as well if you can get them to absolutely <i>loathe </i>the villain. Very occasionally, I’ll come across a story where the “villain” is absolutely unrelatable, and it’s almost like the good guys are fighting a force of nature itself rather than an actual bad guy. This can work, but it’s more of a man vs. nature conflict than anything else. If you want your story to have a <i>villain</i>, then you need to make that villain real. Even if you are trying to make a villain that the readers will absolutely hate, give them a way to understand him a little bit, at least. Give the villain a real personality, not just a plot-based function. Give him emotions and thoughts, even if you never show those thoughts directly. <br />
<br />
Having a real, thinking antagonist also tends to make the story as a whole better. Nothing points out plot-holes like a villain who refuses to do what you want him to do because he’s not that <i>stupid</i>. <br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">*Sympathy connotes a feeling of sorry or pity for the other party. You feel bad for them, even if you don’t understand them. Empathy implies that you DO understand the other person; you understand their emotions and experience them yourself.</span>J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-53476333340132021522010-09-18T17:43:00.000-07:002010-09-18T19:30:49.338-07:00You gotta do the cookin' by the bookThe cake that inspired my last post. <br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyrm7bQiH7YPtyfL9FOHN5tRFLPZYCQqUHxJ3tWr8TodwaMyb7yD4PNL9UWk-Vbljs3yhns5PaL3y5SqyioyJtZzznbjNgypfRDQW_QR-E2QfMb0Y9vYXNiLfYw8xof27tprKw5040zZbO/s1600/IMAG0044.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="248" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhyrm7bQiH7YPtyfL9FOHN5tRFLPZYCQqUHxJ3tWr8TodwaMyb7yD4PNL9UWk-Vbljs3yhns5PaL3y5SqyioyJtZzznbjNgypfRDQW_QR-E2QfMb0Y9vYXNiLfYw8xof27tprKw5040zZbO/s320/IMAG0044.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />
<br />
Hey, I never claimed to be good at icing cakes.<br />
<br />
The cake was great, by the way. Recipe came from <a href="http://www.cinnamonspiceandeverythingnice.com/2010/09/best-one-bowl-yellow-cake-recipe.html">Cinnamon Spice and Everything Nice.</a>J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-48826985283668326052010-09-18T15:08:00.001-07:002010-09-18T15:08:56.949-07:00Food in fictionI don't know about anyone else out there, but I constantly find myself making my characters eat some variation of whatever I'm eating.<br/><br/>Actually, I <i>do</i> know that I'm not the only one who does this. The <a href="http://www.sfwa.org/2009/06/turkey-city-lexicon-a-primer-for-sf-workshops/">Turkey City Lexicon</a> calls this a type of Dischism: "The unwitting intrusion of the author’s physical surroundings, or the author’s own mental state, into the text of the story." <br/><br/>As mentioned above, I do this most often with food. I don't know if it can be called unwitting, exactly. I know I'm doing it, and hopefully it gives the characters a bit of authenticity. Sometimes these situations become character traits in and of themselves. I've got a girl in one story who is a burgeoning tea connoisseur; she loves tea and has an improbable level of knowledge about the drink. It's not a major plot point or anything like that, but before the plot came along and ruined her life, tea was her hobby. In most situations, of course, making these little intrusions into defining character traits would be ridiculous. In the same story as the tea girl, there's a character who likes beans. He has a great recipe for beans, and there's a scene where he's making those beans. But if I were to make him into some sort of bean-obsessed bean man, he would look a bit stupid. Obviously, there's a line that can be crossed.<br/><br/>I just thought of this now because I'm in the middle of making a cake, and surprise! I ended up giving someone cake in a story. I erased the scene a few minutes later, because it really made no sense for there to be cake in that situation. If I had been working on a more whimsical fantasy, cake might have worked, but I wasn't. Surprise cake just didn't work in the slightly gritty setting that I was using.<br/><br/>And so sadly, I have learned that surprise cake isn't <i>always</i> a good thing.<br/><br/>By the way, I highly recommend that anyone who hasn't already read the Turkey City Lexicon linked above do so now; it's both hilarious and informative. If you find yourself repeatedly saying, "Hey, I do that!" it might be a good idea to think things over.J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-47331604875547386472010-09-11T21:42:00.001-07:002010-09-11T22:22:12.454-07:00The Direction of WritingIs it better to write a story straight through? Or is it easier to jump around?<br />
<br />
Obviously, the answer to this question will differ between different people. Some will prefer to start at the beginning and plow through until they reach the end. Others will write the ending first, and find their way there. Others will jump around like veritable madmen, writing wherever they feel like at the moment. Like almost any choice, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. (That's the problem with choices.)<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<b>The Plow:</b><br />
<br />
The biggest advantage to this method is that it's easy to keep track of. Each time you write a scene, you know what has happened earlier in the story -- you've already written it! When plot-conflicts* arise, and they will, you'll often catch them while writing. Starting at the beginning and writing straight through also gives you a sense of accomplishment. When you've written 5000 words, or 50,000 or 100,000, you can look at the manuscript and see the first part of a story. There's no temptation to qualify your accomplishment because there's no connection between scenes. <br />
<br />
The disadvantage is that it can seem boring. Between every awesome scene, there are chunks of story that just don't seem to flow, and it can be difficult to force through those scenes. There's a tendency to get lost while writing this way, as well. Good outlining can help, but this is the easiest method in which to catch yourself meandering pointlessly. It's also possible that while writing, the writer might realize that his planned ending no longer exactly works. The events already written have changes the world or the characters enough so that the original ending simply doesn't fit. This can be frustrating. Despite its disadvantages, this is the method I tend to use. <br />
<br />
<b>Ending First:</b><br />
<br />
As for advantages, well, the ending's already done. You've written out what is quite possibly the most badass part of your story, and you have a definite goal to reach. With such a clear goal in mind, it's harder to get lost in the story. You just work towards the ending that already exists.<br />
<br />
The biggest disadvantage is the other side of one of The Plow's disadvantages. You've already written the ending, and you're actively writing towards that ending the entire time, so there's less chance of the characters missing the motivations and personalities for that ending to occur. This also constrains the story, however. While the writer is able to keep the characters committed to the personalities that have been envisioned for them, they are less likely to grow naturally over the course of the story. Since their destiny has been absolutely predetermined, they can come off as a bit false to a discerning reader. <br />
<br />
<b>Jumping Around:</b><br />
<br />
This is probably the easiest way to write. When I have a story in my head, I often go over scenes repeatedly in my imagination. I don't have to be actively working on a story, it could easily be a story idea that I plan on working on much later on. During the course of the day, while driving, lying in bed, working, playing videogames, or watching TV, pieces of the story will play in my head. These scenes are usually fairly badass, or at least pivotal to the story, and I often find myself impatient to write them. I know I'm not the only person who does this; I imagine it's fairly common. That's the biggest draw to this method: the scenes come out fast. They're <i>easy</i> to write. They've already been refined and envisioned down to nearly the smallest detail, so writing them down takes almost no time at all. There's a fairly big sense of accomplishment that comes with this style: you can write every night with little trouble, as long as you have more of those cool parts left.<br />
<br />
But then what do you do? Half of the story might be finished, but the half that remains is the <i>hard</i> part. The part that slows the writer down, that feels clunky no matter how many times it's rewritten. It's almost impossible to finish the story at this point, especially if it's a longer work like a novel or novella. I know I've never been able to force my way through this part. It's also <i>extremely</i> easy to create plot-conflicts using this method. The scenes might be written, but it's much more difficult to make sure they all agree with each other. (This can, of course, be fixed in editing. I just don't like editing to be much harder than it already is.)<br />
<br />
These are generalizations, obviously, and they're based on my own observations. I'm sure some people who work best by writing all the cool parts first and then slogging through the less exciting parts later. There are certainly some writers who keep track of their plot as if it comes naturally, and never have any problems with plot-conflict. <br />
<br />
Also, I should mention that extremely competent outlining can alleviate many of the disadvantages associated with any of the above methods. And you should always outline. <br />
<br />
(Do as I say, not as I necessarily do.)<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: xx-small;">* By "plot-conflicts," I don't mean conflicts within the narrative, I mean conflicts that the narrative has with itself -- causes that happen after their effects and such.</span>J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-17713606201619143782010-08-28T12:20:00.001-07:002010-08-28T12:20:53.613-07:00Character MotivationThe question "Why do characters want things?" can often be rephrased as "So why exactly <i>is</i> there a plot?"<br/><br/>I've been working on a certain short story for a few days. I had most of the characters sketched out and basically knew their personalities. I'd detailed the history of the city where the story takes place, and given sparser (but enough for my purposes) history to the rest of the world. I'd figured out how the protagonist would interact with the other characters, and written some dialogue between them that looks pretty believable. I knew the primary conflict and a secondary conflict. I had gone so far as to write the climax out entirely, even though I consider that to be almost cheating. <br/><br/>Then I realized <i>why</i> I was cheating. I had no way to plot the story up to the climax, because the protagonist had <i>no reason</i> to get involved with any of this. There was no motivation, and everything that I could think of cram in there was . . . well . . . obviously something I just tried to cram in there. <br/><br/>The story isn't a complete wash, I just need to start from the characters and build my way up to a plot. Going the other direction is easier sometimes, but it results in characters that tend to be a little too vacuum-sealed to the plot. It's easy to fall into the trap, "if it's faster, it must be a good idea!" It's important to remember that characters should generate the plot, not you. (Of course, well-written characters will usually generate something pretty close to the plot you want.)J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6953073197495226244.post-48248164505320398862010-08-24T16:03:00.001-07:002010-08-24T16:07:14.877-07:00ProcrastinationNow <I>that's</I> what I call a good title for the first post on a blog about writing.<br/><br/>There comes a time in everyone's life when they think, "Of course I can't do any serious work tonight, the lights in here are too dim. I need to buy some lamps and really make the place shine. Of course, I can't do that until payday." <br/><br/>If they're lucky, that monster of an excuse is enough to shock them out of complacency and into something that at least <i>resembles</i> work. If they're not lucky, then they may well have need to fear. Soon, entire weeks -- or months! -- will be flying by, using only a single procrastinatory excuse at a time! This is dangerous. Unlike good, old-fashioned, American procrastination, which fills its author with guilt on an hourly (or at least daily) basis, this kind of Freedom-hating nefariousness lets the procrastinator float guiltlessly away on the slacker sea.<br/><br/>Not that slacking is bad in and of itself. Some of the best things happen when slacking. Fortunately (or unfortunately, depending on how much a pessimist you are), work has to be done too. So here we go. It's not that bad.<br/><br/>After all, it only took me a week and a half to get around to writing this post. J. P. Greenehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06104018532434980924noreply@blogger.com0