tea berry-blue

I was just rereading part of 1796 Broadway today and I realized something.  There are two major supporting characters that we introduced who play similar roles in terms of being sometime-support, sometime-antagonists, explicitly non-romantic sexual partners of major characters.

One of them is a man.  He's in his 40s, very worldly, brilliant, manipulative, deliberate, and sociopathic.  He is intentionally malicious and cares about no one but himself.  He tries to damage a character's relationships with other people on purpose, engages in gaslighting, lies, and forces people into situations where there are dependent on him so that he can demand they owe him.  He is unhealthily obsessed with the character he is sleeping with and causes real harm in his attempts to forward his possessiveness and jealousy.  He's smooth, sly, and passive-aggressive.

The other one is a woman. She's 24, very naive, guileless, terrible at lying.  She made one very bad decision and found herself mixed up with bad people in an attempt to right it.  She is by nature honest and has the best intentions, owns up to her mistakes, calls people on their bullshit, and won't engage in games of manipulation.  Her mistakes are all made in the service of friends, and she will put herself in danger to help the people she cares about.  She is supportive yet not enabling, sets good emotional boundaries, and listens to other people's problems until she thinks it's unhealthy and then tells them so.  She's defiant, stubborn, and temperamental.

Guess which one of these characters readers loved and which one they hated. 

I just finished writing a 77000 word fanfic.

FINISHED.

Like, it has a beginning, middle, and end.

It needs some minor editing, but.

FINISHED.

Jekyll And Charlotte  (It's about half-up now, I'm posting it as I edit)

Bruce/Natasha, post-Avengers.

Stolen from _samalander


If I made Cinderella, the audience would immediately be looking for a body in the coach.
— Alfred Hitchcock


When I write a story, what do you immediately look for?

People gave me tons of awesome and amazing feedback about my writing course! I talked to the teacher, and based on her suggestions, I'm actually going with the story that the fewest of you voted for :-P, largely for reasons that daydreamweaver also posted: because the thing I have the biggest problem with is revision, not writing, so using the course for that would be the best way to learn, and then doing it with other stories will get easier.

So the decision is to go with Hypnotist's Gaol.

While I was trying to decide what to work on, I found out just how many semi-finished novels I have lying around.

A few for your edification:

--Firebrand
Coming-of-age fantasy about bluestockings fighting for the right to go to a magical university. Inspired by suffragettes!

--Tilt
This is a story about a high school jousting team in a modern-day world that is completely ordinary except that there are giant fantasy animals like unicorns and flying cats, and jousting takes the place of American football.

--The Traitor's Herbal
American Dustbowl fantasy complete with evil railroad magnates. Think "The Grapes of Wrath" but with angels instead of turtles.

--Squall
Um, for those of you in Erins, Squall is where Andre originally came from. This is a story about an airship captain who takes on a swamp princess who is running from the law.

--Suck
Two teenaged girls with the potential for a lucrative modeling contract are told they need to drop ten pounds. One becomes a vampire in order to lose weight.

Those are only the ones that I have, you know, more than 20 pages or so of. I have like a billionty other ideas that are just outlines or synopses or a couple pages.

My brain is so full of things! I just need to get better about finishing them.

Anyway thank you everyone who gave me feedback, that was awesome.

People gave me tons of awesome and amazing feedback about my writing course! I talked to the teacher, and based on her suggestions, I'm actually going with the story that the fewest of you voted for :-P, largely for reasons that daydreamweaver also posted: because the thing I have the biggest problem with is revision, not writing, so using the course for that would be the best way to learn, and then doing it with other stories will get easier.

So the decision is to go with Hypnotist's Gaol.

While I was trying to decide what to work on, I found out just how many semi-finished novels I have lying around.

A few for your edification:

--Firebrand
Coming-of-age fantasy about bluestockings fighting for the right to go to a magical university. Inspired by suffragettes!

--Tilt
This is a story about a high school jousting team in a modern-day world that is completely ordinary except that there are giant fantasy animals like unicorns and flying cats, and jousting takes the place of American football.

--The Traitor's Herbal
American Dustbowl fantasy complete with evil railroad magnates. Think "The Grapes of Wrath" but with angels instead of turtles.

--Squall
Um, for those of you in Erins, Squall is where Andre originally came from. This is a story about an airship captain who takes on a swamp princess who is running from the law.

--Suck
Two teenaged girls with the potential for a lucrative modeling contract are told they need to drop ten pounds. One becomes a vampire in order to lose weight.

Those are only the ones that I have, you know, more than 20 pages or so of. I have like a billionty other ideas that are just outlines or synopses or a couple pages.

My brain is so full of things! I just need to get better about finishing them.

Anyway thank you everyone who gave me feedback, that was awesome.

All writing can be categorized into two groups: Writing for oneself, and writing for others.

( cut for length )

I love to talk about writing.

Last year and this year, I've found that the most interesting thing about LJ Idol are the "meta" discussions that crop up around writing, reading, commenting, critiquing, and all related subjects. Which is why I've been writing these home game entries about...said subjects!

I've said this before, but LJ Idol (and LJ in general) is about getting to know people better. There is a lot you can learn from someone's writing, but sometimes it's hard to tell if you're learning something about them, or just reading something into what they're saying, especially if they're writing fiction. You only have this very limited window into someone's life and way of thinking, and while, to me, it's totally valid to read meaning into a work an author didn't intend when you are reading for yourself, it's not necessarily the best way to go about making friends.

Sometimes, I get to the end of a piece before I realize it's fiction. This is usually, to me, a compliment to the author's ability, that they wrote something so believable that I think it is reflective of their own life. But sometimes, I get to the end of a piece before I realize it's non-fiction. I don't think that this is complimentary OR non-complimentary: it just is, and whether it has to do with the writing style, a detached tone, whatever: it happens. But I do think it is interesting, when I discover that something I've read is actually true when I was reading it through the lens of a fictive piece, and I often don't even know it unless it's mentioned in the comments.

Every act of writing is also an act of learning about writing, especially when you are writing in an interactive medium such as a blog or LiveJournal, where people can write back to you. And every act of writing in an interactive medium is also an act of learning about people.

One of my favorite things to see in posts where someone is experimenting with writing, or writing a piece of fiction, is not necessarily the piece itself. I love to read people's process notes, or author's notes, or other ruminations on the act of writing the piece.

It's a much-hated question for authors and artists alike, that is asked nearly every time the floor is opened to questions at a panel discussion or a lecture or master class:

"Where do you get your ideas?"

Those of us who write know that every idea comes from a different place. One might be from a dream. One might be from an interaction we had on the street. Another might be from reading someone else's story. Sometimes, they just pop into our heads fully-formed. The question that is exciting, that prompts the story that is exciting is not:

"Where do you get your ideas?"

but

"Where did you get this idea?"

Where did you get this idea?
How did you decide to express it in this way: in fiction, in narrative essay, in poetry?
How did you choose the particular voice with which to express it: a humorous one, a lyrical one, an ominous one?
What were the steps you took along the way, that got you from the idea to the act (apologies to TS Eliot)?

I have said myself, and seen other people say, that when we read fiction, it's hard to get to know the person behind it in the same way we do when we read nonfiction. But even with nonfiction, there is always a space to reveal something about yourself as a writer.

Author's notes can be incredibly fun to write, and can let you drop your narrative voice, free yourself from the restrictions you've put upon yourself while writing the meat of the piece, and provide a handy little peek into your own thoughts and your own identity as a writer. They can say things about you that even a tearful memoir can't say; they can provide insight into that tearful memoir that is deeply personal in a different way from baring your emotional soul. They can deepen the complexity of what might seem to be a simple and casual piece of writing; they can add a note of gravity to a humorous story or essay.

I also love when I see authors reply with comments that reveal a little more of their thinking than what they originally set out to tell. It's neat when someone comments on a particular detail of a story, and the writer takes a moment to reveal a little more about that detail, where it came from, how they decided to include it. I like it because it seems more interesting than a simple "thank you!" but it also helps me get to know the writer behind the words a little better, to peel another proverbial onion layer away from their writing process. And it helps me get to know them as a person, too!

I love to talk about writing, which I said when I started this post. So I love it when I see that other people love to talk about writing, too.

I love to talk about writing.

Last year and this year, I've found that the most interesting thing about LJ Idol are the "meta" discussions that crop up around writing, reading, commenting, critiquing, and all related subjects. Which is why I've been writing these home game entries about...said subjects!

I've said this before, but LJ Idol (and LJ in general) is about getting to know people better. There is a lot you can learn from someone's writing, but sometimes it's hard to tell if you're learning something about them, or just reading something into what they're saying, especially if they're writing fiction. You only have this very limited window into someone's life and way of thinking, and while, to me, it's totally valid to read meaning into a work an author didn't intend when you are reading for yourself, it's not necessarily the best way to go about making friends.

Sometimes, I get to the end of a piece before I realize it's fiction. This is usually, to me, a compliment to the author's ability, that they wrote something so believable that I think it is reflective of their own life. But sometimes, I get to the end of a piece before I realize it's non-fiction. I don't think that this is complimentary OR non-complimentary: it just is, and whether it has to do with the writing style, a detached tone, whatever: it happens. But I do think it is interesting, when I discover that something I've read is actually true when I was reading it through the lens of a fictive piece, and I often don't even know it unless it's mentioned in the comments.

Every act of writing is also an act of learning about writing, especially when you are writing in an interactive medium such as a blog or LiveJournal, where people can write back to you. And every act of writing in an interactive medium is also an act of learning about people.

One of my favorite things to see in posts where someone is experimenting with writing, or writing a piece of fiction, is not necessarily the piece itself. I love to read people's process notes, or author's notes, or other ruminations on the act of writing the piece.

It's a much-hated question for authors and artists alike, that is asked nearly every time the floor is opened to questions at a panel discussion or a lecture or master class:

"Where do you get your ideas?"

Those of us who write know that every idea comes from a different place. One might be from a dream. One might be from an interaction we had on the street. Another might be from reading someone else's story. Sometimes, they just pop into our heads fully-formed. The question that is exciting, that prompts the story that is exciting is not:

"Where do you get your ideas?"

but

"Where did you get this idea?"

Where did you get this idea?
How did you decide to express it in this way: in fiction, in narrative essay, in poetry?
How did you choose the particular voice with which to express it: a humorous one, a lyrical one, an ominous one?
What were the steps you took along the way, that got you from the idea to the act (apologies to TS Eliot)?

I have said myself, and seen other people say, that when we read fiction, it's hard to get to know the person behind it in the same way we do when we read nonfiction. But even with nonfiction, there is always a space to reveal something about yourself as a writer.

Author's notes can be incredibly fun to write, and can let you drop your narrative voice, free yourself from the restrictions you've put upon yourself while writing the meat of the piece, and provide a handy little peek into your own thoughts and your own identity as a writer. They can say things about you that even a tearful memoir can't say; they can provide insight into that tearful memoir that is deeply personal in a different way from baring your emotional soul. They can deepen the complexity of what might seem to be a simple and casual piece of writing; they can add a note of gravity to a humorous story or essay.

I also love when I see authors reply with comments that reveal a little more of their thinking than what they originally set out to tell. It's neat when someone comments on a particular detail of a story, and the writer takes a moment to reveal a little more about that detail, where it came from, how they decided to include it. I like it because it seems more interesting than a simple "thank you!" but it also helps me get to know the writer behind the words a little better, to peel another proverbial onion layer away from their writing process. And it helps me get to know them as a person, too!

I love to talk about writing, which I said when I started this post. So I love it when I see that other people love to talk about writing, too.

Notice: I have a lot of regular life stuff I want to post about but this was a surreal week and I just haven't been able to get my thoughts together. Also, my computer cable broke after I uploaded some of the Thanksgiving prep how-tos I meant to post, so they didn't happen. I'm on my netbook and eternally thankful that I am able to do things like afford a netbook to cover me for computing and communication purposes when my usual computer (which I am also eternally thankful for) gets broken.

( But this is a post about elephants. And about rooms. And about writing. )

Concrit is hard!

It's also been a source of drama in almost every writing-or-art-oriented group or community I've been part of.

A few years ago, living in Boston with very few friends, I signed up for a writing course as a way to meet people. One of the requirements was to read four thirty-page selections a week (by members of the class), and make notes, then engage in a crit session.

I dropped the course after two classes.

Why? Because no one was actually interested in hearing criticism.

Some people are better editors than writers. I consider myself one of those "Some people." I don't know that many people do, but I think I am a great editor. When I was studying film, I gravitated to editing, when I graduated, I worked my first job as a photo editor. I am good at taking other people's work and really making it shine, no matter what the other people's work is. So I worked really, really hard in that class, to write serious, considerate concrit that wasn't just about telling people what they did wrote, but giving concrete examples of how they could improve it.

And I was told that "well, not everyone is GOING to like a book like this. This is really for a NICHE audience," with the very clear intimation that I wasn't intelligent enough to qualify as part of that select niche audience. That my critique wasn't welcome unless I "understood" what they were trying to do.

I am pretty sure I understood what they were trying to do. I am also pretty sure that they were failing at it, or that it wasn't worth doing in the first place. Especially since out of the four selections I read, I was given this response every. single. time. One novel out of four intended to appeal to a special, niche audience? Sure thing! I can buy that! But four out of four, and I tend to chalk it up to a weird, insular, can-do-no-wrong atmosphere that was evolving in the class. So I left.

On the internet, especially in a blogging community, there's a weird line when you start talking about constructive criticism. We know, instinctively, that concrit has no place in someone's personal blog posts about their every day lives. If someone write five hundred words about how their grandma is dying, you know that the appropriate response might be some words of sympathy or encouragement, not a remark to explain that you felt the second paragraph was too wordy. However, plenty of bloggers and journalers are trying to cultivate a voice, either as practice for a potential career, or to bring in an audience to their blog. And on top of that, plenty of people post "actual writing:" stories, essays, and other tidbits that are clearly more formalized than a simple blog entry. Entries where people are actually giving thought to the way they are structuring their writing, their word choice, the things people think about when trying to craft a piece of writing, as opposed to just getting the thoughts on paper (or virtual paper, as the case may be). And then we're dealing with another story. Because:

As soon as you start putting for-serious-writing up in any public venue, you have to be ready to accept concrit.

Accept doesn't mean agree. Accept means accept. You don't need to like it, but you do need to appreciate and value that someone else went to the trouble of reading your work with a criticism lens on, which is much harder than reading something just for enjoyment. Ninety percent of the time, when someone leaves concrit, they're doing it because they genuinely think you can improve. And if you ever, ever imagine maybe writing professionally-- and I don't just mean as a published author, I mean as someone who writes a presentation or a report for your employer-- you need to be able to take criticism, synthesize criticism (that is, consider each piece and figure out how to work it into your finished product, or whether you should discard it), and move on. You'll also need to learn how to accept criticism that is given once the final product is complete, and just deal with the fact that someone didn't like something about your work, and think about whether it's something you want to consider for your next piece of work.

It isn't fair to your readers to post writing and assume that they will only say 100% positive things. It isn't fair to tell people that they're only allowed to speak if they have something positive to say. You know that whole "If you can't say anything nice..." adage? "Nice" and "positive" aren't the same thing. Sometimes the nicest thing someone can do for you is tell you what isn't working for them.

That doesn't mean that all crit is nice, or that all crit is constructive. I've also seen people rip someone to pieces, formulate random personal attacks, or just plain not know what the heck they're talking about, all in the name of concrit.

Rule of thumb, if you're the one giving concrit? For it to be "concrit" and not just "crit," something about it has to be "con." Telling someone what's wrong with their work is one thing, but tell them how you think they might improve it: that's what makes it constructive. Always include a suggestion for how they might make it better. It doesn't have to be a very specific one-- in fact, I tend to loathe suggestions that are too specific, because it can verge on rewriting instead of suggesting, but make a suggestion. Show that you're not just thinking negatively, not just pointing out flaws.

Another good thing to consider is the difference between "I don't like this" and "this is bad." It can be a very hard thing to learn to criticize a piece of writing or artwork that is not, and would never be, to your taste, even if it were absolutely perfect. You may hate science fiction based in the eighteenth century due to a tragic accident involving time-traveling Voltaire, but that doesn't make all science fiction based in the eighteenth century bad. It just means that you don't like it. Unless you're getting paid to do otherwise, it is totally okay not to leave comments on things that you know you won't like, if you think your personal preference is going to make it difficult for you to give a worthwhile critique.

As an LJ Idol-related aside, you not liking something also doesn't mean that it "doesn't belong" in the competition or that it "doesn't count" as "journal writing." There is only one person who gets to decide whether something "counts," and it is likely not you. You get to decide if you want to vote for it. If you don't like something, you can choose not to vote for it, even if you recognize that it is good. But if someone wants to write poetry or make videos or photo montages of snowmen to tell their story, it counts, because those are the rules of the competition. There is nothing wrong with saying "that's not to my personal taste," but saying "that's not writing," or "that doesn't belong here," is making a leap from your personal taste to an objective value judgment that really, nobody should be making.

So, basically, if you're leaving criticism, make sure you're not being a jerk. If you receive criticism, unless you're pretty sure the person who left it was being a jerk (and you can always ask a friend for a second opinion), it shouldn't be something to fuss about. Maybe you're just trying to relate feelings and aren't too concerned about the quality of your writing or the way you told your story, and that can be frustrating, but the person who left the criticism probably thought your writing was good enough that they thought you were trying for for-serious writing. If you really, really aren't ready for criticism on a piece of writing, tell people so! It should be your responsibility to tell people "no concrit, please," if you don't want any. I know there are a lot of people who disagree with me on that point, but I personally would like to strive for a larger community where solid concrit is open and welcome, not one where people have to seek it out, or where all concrit, even the best concrit, is looked upon with scorn. Listening to what other people have to say about your writing is one of the best ways to become a better writer, and being a better writer isn't just about being a professional writer. Writing is a major part of almost everyone's life. Improving it shouldn't be unwelcome.

You know, unless the person talking is being a jerk.