Untitled

I was recently reading a book that was somewhere in the vicinity of 500 pages. It was holding my attention well at first but eventually those few things that weren’t connecting with me as a reader (mostly craft but a little bit characterization as well) kept pushing me further and further from the story until I got to around page 400 and abandoned the whole endeavor (possibly temporarily, possibly forever, who knows). However, I remain fascinated by the book being a perfect example of what I don’t like about my own writing.

 

My own writing, I must say, is a meager and not oft seen thing. I enjoy writing and have outlined dozens (hundreds?) of stories but I seem way too easily distracted by “research.” Reading is my favorite brand of research but I can be distracted for weeks on random scientific or historical topics in the internet rabbit hole. Despite that, I have a distinct aspect of craft that never changes no matter what writing challenges I might otherwise explore. I like using the fewest words possible and I like writing built as much around what is not said as what is.

 

So, back to this book I was reading. Scenes were constructed and dialogue used in eerily similar ways to my own writing. But to my own writing that I discarded or re-wrote because I wasn’t quite hitting the right balance. The exact right balance is a thing nebulously defined in my own head and constantly refined as I write (seriously, I’ll go back and revise something I wrote 10 years ago just because I think I’ve finally found the exact right turn of phrase). But, whatever it is, this book was not hitting it. I was constantly editing it in my mind and rearranging scenes or dialogue to tell the story better. It was like I was revising a first draft and who wants that in a reading experience? I might have got over it but I was also finding the main relationship between two brothers increasingly tedious (turns out there is a finite number of fist fights I can tolerate between two people before I’m over it) so it was time to set the book aside. But, but, but! I’m glad to have come by it as I thought long and hard as to why someone who employs my own darling craft preference could be so majorly striking out with me. And now I have words! Words!

 

There was no emotional resonance.

 

The thing about saying less and using what is not said as a way to communicate with your reader is that, if done incorrectly, connections can feel abrupt and flat.  An emotional connection with the characters or situation becomes a lot more difficult. Obscure dialogue or interactions can result in an inquisitive reader avidly turning pages or to a confused, disinterested reader not much bothered at giving up 4/5s of the way through the book.

 

What I want is the balance of less leading to that tug in my chest that means I can’t imagine not staying with a story on its emotional path.

Great article for writers

Make conscious choices rather than default choices.

Click here for full article

Must Read!

16. For the first time in his life, he found himself imagining a future together with someone. He was embarrassed to tell her this but he had never really been in love with the women he had dated. “Well who would play me in this rom-com of your life?” she teasingly inquired. “You have such beautiful olive skin,” he crooned, “so you can be a person of color or racially ambiguous in the book but definitely a white woman in the movie.”

Don't miss the whole article here!

I expect better!

I recently read The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat (pub. 1984) and was pretty astonished at the language used by a scientist and non-fiction writer regarding individuals with severe mental impairments. (Lucky for me, a friend read it at just about the same time so we were able to vent in a flurry of email exchanges.) Initially, I was only annoyed at the lack of scientific detail. I chalked that up to it being pubbed in the 80s, the scientific literacy of laypersons has increased enormously since then so I can't exactly blame an author/publisher for being aware of the contemporary landscape. But that offensive (and inaccurate!) language was just inexcusable. So, ok, pass on that author and moving on...

And, bam! It happens again!

I just finished Isabella (pub. 2005) and the author was at pains to explain some of the differences between current and 14th Century English (and Welsh, Scottish, French:) cultural norms. She, like many historians, believes that Edward II was gay or bisexual. There's some explanation about how that wasn't an accepted lifestyle at the time (if only it was 100% accepted now! dare to dream!) and its relevance to the events of the book. She later says that he was capable of (or not revolted by?? can't find exact sentence) "normal sex" since he had not only 4 children with his wife but at least 1 extramarital child. Um, "normal" sex? Looks like maybe you just gave yourself away on that one.

In another instance she describes Isabella as "highly sexed." Hunhhh????? Isabella is thought to have been a woman interested in sex (omg, alert the presses) and so she's "highly" sexed? WTF???? By the author's interpretation, Edward II had two long-term extramarital lovers, a wife with whom he had children (and so, presumably, sex), and numerous (brief) liaisons with lovers before he was married and some after. Where is his description as "highly sexed?" Looks like maybe you just gave yourself away on that one.

And there's this: "Reginald, a widower, was dark of colouring and character." Some of the main players had their physical descriptions relayed but not over many and certainly not such a minor dude as this one (he was featured in ~4 paragraphs) but, dang, it's fun to lump "dark" coloring in with character because it just sounds great and, hell, there isn't a significant portion of the population that still suffers from stereotypes of "dark" being bad! Looks like maybe you just gave yourself away on that one.


So, yeah, it appears that 21st Century historians are as likely as 14th Century historians to say that gay/bisexual individuals have "abnormal" sex, women who like sex are unusual*** and to be described differently than other women (and men, natch, who are clearly always up for it), and "dark" characters are bad and match the "dark" color nicely. Ugh! Ugh, ugh, ugh!!!! There goes another author.

The shame about all this is (I mean, other than the obvious), these academics/scientists write on some really interesting topics. I want to know these things. I want to learn these things. However, I am past the point of being willing to sift through offensive garbage to get to the good stuff. It's unacceptable anytime but certainly in works of academic rigor.


Come on, people, I expect better!

***ETA: or more likely in the 21st Century??? Just read a very edifying passage in The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England (thanks for that, Beth!) and it seems the flack that Isabella was catching for her behavior was more because she was a queen rather than because she was a woman. (Though they weren't exactly shy with the "woman is the root of all evil" stuff, be she a queen or no.)

A Must Read

I was hunting around for the character list* from The Luminaries, and came by this fantastic article by Eleanor Catton.

I love this type of piece. It's not one you read and then go "no, no, no that's all wrong" or "yes, that's exactly what I think" but one where you think "there are so many interesting observations here, I want to have more discussion right now."

Dr M and I talk about this all the time:

The machine of consumerism is designed to encourage us all to believe that our preferences are significant and self-revealing; that a taste for Coke over Pepsi, or for KFC over McDonald’s, means something about us; that our tastes comprise, in sum, a kind of aggregate expression of our unique selfhood.

And this observation speaks directly to my inner reading self:

At its best, literature is pure encounter: it resists consumption because it cannot be used up and it cannot expire. The bonds that are formed between readers and writers, between readers and characters, and between readers and ideas, are meaningful in a way that the bonds formed between consumers and products can never be

But don't take my word for it. Go read it! It's a readers must read.


*why could I not just reference the book's list, you ask? well, I got the audiobook, all 29+ hours of it.

"It's not a literary question."

Great Article by Kameron Hurley

Here's the link.

Populating a world with men, with male heroes, male people, and their “women cattle and slaves” is a political act. You are making a conscious choice to erase half the world.

As storytellers, there are more interesting choices we can make. 

Technical Topic - Narrative Non-fiction

This is a great interview of Rebecca Skloot with its main topic being structure. Very interesting stuff.

The 500th

My first post was on Jan 19, 2009 (and in it i complained about fb! jeez! you'd think in almost three years i could have rustled up some new topics). I thought in this, my 500th post, I would share the winding road that led me to start posting stuff on the internet.

I've enjoyed writing for as long as I remember. Even so, I didn't - and don't - consider myself a writer. I remember getting lots of encouragement about becoming a writer (this is when I was pretty young) and receiving lots of "she'll be a writer someday" comments. But I never really did want to be a writer. I'm just someone who likes to write. It might be that some see no distinction between these but I think of writers as the people who say "I have all these stories that have to be told" or "I can't stay sane if I don't write." I don't have any of these problems. I have lots of stories in my head but if they stay there it's not really a problem. If I go months without writing anything I don't really think much of it. But the fact remains that I quite enjoy writing and I always come back to it.

I've gone through phases of writing just about everything but I always come back to fiction and short non-fiction. They are my favorites. Anyway, because I've always enjoyed writing there was a time in which I was repeatedly gifted with journals. I think at one time "journaling" was quite the thing and if you enjoyed
writing of course you "journaled" because even people who didn't like writing kept journals. I never did. I could never keep up with it for more than a couple of days. I didn't have anything to say on most days. I didn't want to recount my day (boring!), list out my problems (not productive for my type of problem solving), or carry on about my joys. So I quietly collected a pile of blank journals and wrote stories and poetry on loose leaf, lined paper.

Now let's fast forward to my junior year of college. This is before the internet as we now know it, its ubiquity and its speed. It was still the type of thing you could choose not to participate in. (I'm just trying to paint a picture of the prevailing technological vibe at the time I was introduced to the Writer's Notebook.) So there I am entering my second semester after transferring to a new university and finding that my first couple years of over-achieving (I was much more ambitious in my youth:) had left me with credits to spare. I flipped through the class catalog (do they even print these anymore?) and signed up for the only writing class that fit into my schedule: Writing for Teachers. This was an upper-level English course for education majors. There were ~20 students and, except for me, every student was planning to teach high school English or similar. The class was devoted to teaching future teachers how to teach writing.

I was dubious when I saw the syllabus and assigned texts but the class turned out to be fantastic, its instructor a person I consider it to have been my great good fortune to know. (Plus I always liked how she was obviously intrigued and pleased to have a science major sign up for her class.) There is much I could say about that class but my focus here is on the Writer's Notebook and how it and Dr. Betsy Ervin changed my writing life.

The Writer's Notebook was tackled pretty much right out of the gate. Dr. Ervin wanted it to be a tool we used as her students and a tool we would share with our students one day (I use "we" loosely as I was not bound for an English classroom). The Writer's Notebook was to be a place that we used to record what we observed of the world around us. It was meant to make us more observant and sensitive to events and the people we encountered. She went out of her way to define all the ways in which it was NOT a journal and that we were not journaling (sgwordy breathed a big sigh of relief:). The Writer's Notebook was to be a companion to our writing not to us.

I was hooked from day one.

I still have all my Writer's Notebooks and I'm going to pull that first one out just to give an example of the types of things I chose to include in it.

-overheard statements around campus, at work, while traveling.
-descriptions of buildings
-a drawing of an overhead view of an island I had short-lived ideas of working on
-telephone numbers of friends, grocery lists (this of course being contraband but needs must)
-story ideas
-essay ideas
-character sketches
-portions of stuff I was writing (always nice to follow through on a scene or idea right when it comes to you)
-vocab lists

This first Writer's Notebook was a large sketch diary I happened to have at my house. I have since learned that my favorite thing to use as a Notebook is a 9x6in sketch diary because I often paste in postcards, ads, or newspaper articles and I don't like doing that on lined paper (who can explain it?) I also didn't want it to be so big that it was inconvenient to carry around.

One day, post WN, I was digging through an old box from high school and my freshman year of college. I found what could only be described as a Writer's Notebook. At the time of its use, I thought of it as a scrapbook but as I sifted through it then I realized it was a rough draft of what I would later learn to cultivate as a Writer's Notebook. Looking through it now I find the following:

-quotes from books, songs and movies I liked
-pictures of cute actors
-poetry (when I used to write poetry)
-lsu tigers stickers
-my favorite poems
-pictures of animals
-poem a friend wrote for me
-poetry written between my grandmother and uncle when he was in prison (some things are hard to say right out)
-ads and comics I liked
-concert tickets
-brilliant insights from my own brain (ha!)

Eventually the internet became what it is and much of what I was reading was online. The articles I found interesting were online. Funny videos would spark random thoughts. Discussion boards would have something interesting going on. These targets of my observation weren't exactly easy to put into a Writer's Notebook. And I was sometimes reading these thingums called blogs.

Eureka!!!!

I started a blog as a digital Writer's Notebook. For many months the only person who knew I was doing this was Dr Musacha. It was my own place to store random thoughts and link to things online that I found interesting. It was an easy place to hold videos and pics. I still kept (and keep) a Writer's Notebook but this blog served as its digital extension. Eventually I shared its web address with some of my friends who I discuss writing with. Then with some friends that I like to talk about books with and then just to some friends who are mildly curious as to what my brain can vomit up from time to time. Then, of course, there is the wonderful blogging community out there with whom one can become engaged on various topics. In one very important way this digital version is not like my paper version: it is public. I find that I always have in the back of my mind that what goes onto the internet, no matter how unimportant, is out there and so in the public domain. The digital portion of my Writer's Notebook is no longer strictly a Writer's Notebook but it has connected me to many other people who, like me, like to write. I find it a very satisfactory evolution of my Writer's Notebook and my writing life.

And so I find myself here in this place on the internet, still engaged in a writing life, in large part because of the encouragement and mentoring of Dr. Betsy Ervin. I went on to take her Essay Writing class the next semester (wherein I got to show off my Writer's Notebook and talk about how much I loved it as a tool) and get to know her a bit more. I would consider our relationship to have been mostly professional with a little bit of personal. I remember visiting her house just after her daughter was born and keeping in touch even when I wasn't in one of her classes - and even a bit after I graduated. I ran into her once by chance when I was back in Wilmington for a visit but by then we were not much in touch any longer. I can only assume she was serving as an excellent mentor for a new crop of students. I hope she knew what a positive effect she had on my life. I know I am not the only one to remember, with respect and gratitude, her generous and open manner as a teacher.

Thus endeth my 500th post, in memory and appreciation of Dr. Betsy Ervin

Story gripes

I'm making this tart right now (using figs and pears from our CSA box) and it makes me think I don't have a clear idea of what a tart is. I'm watching this thing bake in the oven and it's crust with some sliced fruit on top. It doesn't seem very tart-like to me. Even after I drizzle on the honey I'm still thinking this isn't going to be much of a tart. Meh.

I've got a little list of gripes going regarding things I encounter in books. Interested in adding your own in the comments?

1. Amnesia as Personality Adjustment

The kind of amnesia often featured in stories is quite rare in real life. I really dig the plot line though so I'm always happy to see it. However, I don't get why people who previously chose to participate in Bad Things are always so horrified to learn of their past behavior. This is so often seen in the amnesia story that I have to assume that there is a very quiet but adamant group of folks trying to subliminally convince us all that we are not blank slates but basically good. Moreover, we want to be basically good and it's environment that leads us astray. I want to read the story where the gal/guy wakes up, discovers awesome powers of BadAssery (assassin, master thief, smuggler extraordinaire) and is totally stoked to get back in the saddle.

2. The overuse of

a) "somehow"

I am so sick of sentences starting with "somehow." Somehow, I managed to get up. Somehow, I knew this was the right thing to do. Somehow, I knew s/he was lying. Somehow, I was able to defeat the mighty dragon. Gah! It was done! I get it. Either create a story in which I can deduce my own "somehow" or explain it. Or, hell, just let it go. The story will speak for itself. If you write it and you don't believe it, trust me, "somehow" isn't going to convince anyone.

b) hatred of self

This is another one that feels like lazy writing. If a character has performed an act that results in actual self-loathing shouldn't I be able to deduce that from the characterization? If I can't, isn't that a bigger problem than finding space to include: "Despite his commitment to never wear purple socks again, he did, and he hated himself for it?"

c) Complete sentence. Adverb!

I don't even know the name for the grammar rule this is breaking but the liberty is used way too much these days. I get that it's stylistic and meant to convey a certain tone, tempo, and feeling but holy shitballs I want it to go away. Badly!

3. Series' reviews

I know I gripe about this all the time but it drives me up a wall. I am finally ready to accept the fact that I must be the only person bothered by this because it's in almost 100% of series books. It must be what people want. I've been pretty actively avoiding series this year and this is one of the main reasons. There are a few I'm sticking with (speaking of, the last book of The Inheritance Trilogy is out this month - woohoo!) but I have to really (to the infinity power, lets say) like a book at this point to want to pursue the series if it turns out to be a book that's part of a series. Some time ago I read a book that I really enjoyed that was the first of a series. I was almost there on getting the next book but ultimately decided not to. The last couple weeks have not been fruitful for me in the reading department so I downloaded a sample from the aforementioned series Book Two. It has a prologue. The prologue is a summary of Book One. I suppose that's marginally better than the glaring and awkward way series' reviews are usually shoved into the first chapter but it still annoyed me. It annoys me as a series reader because I've already read Book One and it annoys me as a general reader because it feels like a laundry list of What You Should Know To Enjoy This Story. Why do writers (editors?) not trust a story to speak for itself? Why do they feel a review is necessary?


ETA: This just in! After reading this I hopped over to Ms. Bourne's blog and she has some great advice for series writers. 

The Levels of Death for Fictional Characters, Part II

So sgwordy entered the lair of Achievement Whoring and asked the good Dr to share his Levels of Death theory. Enjoy!

(NOTE: It's probably obvious for a topic like this but beware spoilers.)

Dr Musacha says...

If you missed Part I click here.

Level 2 – They killed X???  YOU BASTARDS!

Now it’s on.  A level 2 death involves a character who has been with us throughout most of the story.  They’re a major part of the narrative, with well-established backstory, personality, and motivations.  Essentially, we’re talking about anyone that you might refer to as “one of the main characters” WITHOUT being the main hero/heroine/villain.

The impact of a level 2 death cannot be overstated.  This is a character that we’ve grown to care about, identify with, and root for (wow, that was a lot of dangling prepositions).  Assuming that the writer has done his/her job properly, we are NOT going to like seeing this person die.  But see it we will, because level 2 deaths (unlike 3 and 4) pretty much never happen offscreen.  After all, the author is sacrificing an important character and obviously wants to reap the full emotional impact of that decision.

The following may seem counterintuitive, but bear with me: Level 2 deaths are the most critical ones to do correctly.  Period.  Now, you might be wondering how that’s possible since we have another level to go.  I’ll get there in a second, but understand that level 1 deaths are actually pretty easy.  But level 2?  They can make all the difference between pushing your narrative to a whole new level and completely derailing it, losing your audience forever.

The key point to understand is that your level 2 death may well mean killing the audience’s favorite character.  Think about it: if you ask someone who their favorite Star Wars character is, how many say Luke?  Sure, you need a compelling hero and villain, but people tend to gravitate to the side characters (at least the ones that are decently developed).  So when you off that person, it better be in a way that respects the bond that’s formed between said character and the audience.  NOTE: This is doubly true for characters in a series, because we’ve had all the more time to get attached.

An example from my own experience: I enjoyed most of Dancing with Wolves.  It was an interesting story (if a bit slow) and shot with a nice eye for the surrounding environment.  Then some jackass army officers take turns firing at Two-Socks, the wolf that keeps Dunbar company, killing the poor animal because it doesn’t know to run away.  Now, I get what the writer was going for here…he wants us to understand that the army officers are the bad guys so we’ll be happy when the Sioux kill them later.  Well you know what guy?  I already figured that out.  There was no damn reason to show Two Socks being unceremoniously murdered.  If you were looking for an emotional reaction, then you got one.  I loathe your crappy movie with every fiber of my being.  Was that what you wanted?

Level 2 deaths are pretty common with villains.  It’s usually the right hand man, who ironically is often tougher/more evil than the main bad guy.  Also note that level 2 deaths often happen late in the story, because they serve as the inspiration that the hero/heroine needs to vanquish his or her foes and achieve victory in their fallen comrade’s memory.

Other examples:
Mick/Apollo – Rocky III/IV
Dumbledore – Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Obi-wan Kenobi – Star Wars
Count Rugen (the man with six fingers) – Princess Bride


Level 1 – And then there were two

Okay, it doesn’t HAVE to be two.  There are instances where there’s more than one main protagonist (though rarely is there more than one main villain).  Still, we’re definitely looking at the cream of the crop here.

Level 1 deaths happen almost exclusively at the climax of the story, largely because anyone suffering a level 1 death was so key to the plot that it can hardly go on without them.  Imagine if Darth Vader died in Return of the Jedi, but then there was another 45 minutes of faffing about on Endor fighting generic stormtroopers.  Anticlimactic, no?

Compared to level 2, level 1 deaths are actually pretty easy to write.  Most people expect the main villain to buy the farm at the end, so it will hardly come as a shock.  And as for the hero, the idea of the tragic protagonist who sacrifices himself at the end of the story is so old that a guy named William Shakespeare had mastered it back when humans were still trying to invent fire (NOTE: this article does not necessarily reflect the opinions of sgwordy, her parent company, or historical accuracy in any way).

There are too many examples to count, but here are a few:
Butch and Sundance – Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
Maximus – Gladiator
Hillary – Beaches
Captain John Miller – Saving Private Ryan
William Wallace – Braveheart (this is historical I suppose, but still)
The Predator – Predator
Thelma and Louise – I’m hoping you can guess


So there you have it.  sgwordy…do YOU have a favorite example of one of the Levels of Death?

Why yes, I do! I'm actually going to include something for each level:

Level 4 - All to whom Terry Pratchett made this most hilarious dedication and this poor bastard who did not want it.

Level 3 - I'm gonna cheat a little on this one because I'm choosing a character in my own work in progress. Two reasons: the first - it was this character's death (and your reading of it) that first brought the Levels of Death theory to my attention and the second - because he truly died as he lived, serving the plot.

Level 2 - Since this is the trickiest of all I'm going to give an example of it done badly and an example of it done well. The done badly example was the offing of The Syndicate in The X-Files. I'm a believer (Mulder would be so proud:) that there was no way to do this well and that it being done at all was a mistake. The done well example is Amylin (played by Paul Reubens) in Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

side note: What I find interesting about level 2 is that the character's relationship with the audience is more important than the character's relationship to the heroine/hero when it comes to a death that will not alienate the audience.

Level 1 - Elphaba in Wicked by Gregory Maguire. Holy damn that was some kind of memorable.


Anyone else have some particularly good or bad examples of the levels?

The Levels of Death for Fictional Characters, Part I

So sgwordy entered the lair of Achievement Whoring and asked the good Dr to share his Levels of Death theory. Enjoy!

Dr Musacha says...

In real life, death is inevitable. But in fiction, death is the result of a conscious decision made by the author (unless of course it’s based on historical events…that trip to Ford’s Theater is probably not going to end well for Lincoln). And while you may think that character deaths are thrown into stories at the random whim of the writer, the vast majority of deaths fall into one of four escalating categories that I refer to as “Levels of Death”. Each level (and thus each death) has a distinct purpose for a story, and I firmly believe that the misapplication of this system can ruin an otherwise great story.

To illustrate the concept, I’m going to review each level starting at the bottom (Level 4) and culminating at the top (Level 1). For further clarification, I’ll give examples of each level based on the medium of movies (though this concept works for books, video games, and so on). Note that spoilers abound (we’re talking about characters dying here!) though I’ve tried to restrict my examples to well known movies that should come as little surprise. Still if you’re the type of person who’s been holding out on this whole “Star Wars” thing and you have a good feeling about how things turn out for this Darth Vader guy (whoops!) then maybe stop now.

Level 4 – The Red Shirt Guy

If you know anything about Star Trek, then you’re already nodding your head. When Kirk, Spock, Sulu, and some generic guy in a red shirt beam down to the alien planet where another ship’s crew disappeared without a trace, guess who isn’t coming back? Let’s just say they’re paying Shatner a lot of money to captain the Enterprise, not to die before the second commercial.

Wondering if you’re seeing a level 4 death? First, ask yourself if you know the character’s name. Or if he/she even has a name. How about defining characteristics…does he have a back story, a defined personality, an established connection to other characters? If not, you’re definitely in level 4 territory. Even more telling, how do the other characters react when “red shirt” dies? Is it like a dark cloud hanging over the rest of the film/episode/book? Or do they pretty much proceed like nothing happened, as if they were expecting it from the start?

And that’s the thing: they DO expect it. The reason they aren’t getting all emotional is because the writer didn’t care about “red shirt” guy and he didn’t expect you to either. His death is akin to a little science experiment, like tossing a gerbil to a python and taking notes on how the snake dispatches it. It’s the writer’s way of telling you “Kirk and Spock will be facing a tentacle monster this week, and this is how it kills people. Keep watching to see how they defeat it!”

As for villains (because hey, they’re characters too!), a Level 4 death is less of an option and more of a career choice for the vast majority of henchmen. The second you slap on that generic outfit and join the legion of baddies, know that your Level 4 death will come swiftly, surely, and with no fanfare whatsoever from the protagonist. You might as well be a traffic cone with a machine gun taped to it, pal.

Other examples:
Fat guy from New York that gets squashed by a meteor – Armageddon
Guard who gets his heart pulled out of his chest – Indiana Jones: Temple of Doom
Late night swimmer – Jaws
Practically every person killed by Stallone/Schwarzenegger/etc. in action movies

Level 3 – I died as I lived…serving the plot

Congratulations, you’ve been promoted to level 3. You’ve got a name (probably first AND last), some lines, and a personality that can likely be summarized in five or fewer words. You might even be played by a recognizable character actor (Hey, I saw that guy on Seinfeld once…). Here’s the bad news though: you can still die. Oh, you might be thinking “I’m not one of these generic types so I’ll be okay.” No such luck though, because the reality is that the story can still easily proceed without you.

A level 3 death differs from level 4 in several key ways. First, the character that dies is far more distinct. More importantly, the main characters acknowledge a level 3 death as momentous and important. They are often stricken with shock or grief that such an event could transpire. What a level 3 death does is announce to the audience “Shit just got real here…this is a story where people CAN DIE”. Nobody thinks that the monster that offed red-shirt is going to get Kirk. But if a level 3 character death occurs, suddenly things get murkier. The anguish that the characters are showing is partly driven by the realization that “Death is in play and I could be next…”

Level 3 deaths also often serve to “thin the ranks”. As in, the author needed a group of people at the start of the story for the purposes of dialogue/plot exposition/etc., but now things are a little crowded. A nice level 3 death or two can whittle down the group while creating an emotional impact for the survivors and the audience. These usually happen in the middle of a story, since we need time to know the character but not so much that we get attached.

Level 3 death is pretty rare for a villain, as it involves a person who’s slightly higher up than a henchman but still not important enough to survive to the climax of the film.  Generally the proper order is to kill all the generic guys, then the sub-boss types, and finally the main baddie.  Still, it does happen.  I’m reminded of the classic quote from Commando:

Arnold: Remember Sully, when I promised I’d kill you last?
Sully: That’s right, you did!
Arnold: I lied.

Other examples:
Harry Ellis, who pretends to be Bruce Willis’ friend and gets shot – Die Hard
May the hooker – Dark City
Helen, the nice old lady who gets blown out of the bus – Speed
William Laughlin, a member of the resistance – Running Man


Levels 1 and 2 are here.

Verbs

This article waxed a bit poetic for my taste but I loved the section on verbs:

The passive voice in particular was a crisis. “Was” only told you that something existed—this was not enough. And on this topic, I remember one of her fugues almost exactly:

You want vivid writing. How do we get vivid writing? Verbs, first. Precise verbs. All of the action on the page, everything that happens, happens in the verbs. The passive voice needs gerunds to make anything happen. But too many gerunds together on the page makes for tinnitus: Running, sitting, speaking, laughing, inginginginging. No. Don’t do it. The verbs tell a reader whether something happened once or continually, what is in motion, what is at rest. Gerunds are lazy, you don’t have to make a decision and soon, everything is happening at the same time, pell-mell, chaos. Don’t do that. Also, bad verb choices mean adverbs. More often than not, you don’t need them. Did he run quickly or did he sprint? Did he walk slowly or did he stroll or saunter?

Implied History

Sometime in the past year I had a eureka moment in reading. It was the moment I recognized the genius of what I'm going to call Implied History. Often it's quite obvious why a book is so remarkable. But then, just as often, I don't have the words to describe what makes a book so exquisite. I know it is exquisite, I know I can't stop reading, and most importantly I can't stop thinking about the characters. Often it's an excellent premise that sucks me in but when I am drawn back to the same book time and again it's almost always because of the characters. A good plot will only hold up so many times but a character to love becomes a lifelong romance.

This eureka moment was recognizing a great tool in developing characters. It's a tool I can now identify immediately when reading and one I am trying to incorporate into my own writing. This tool is Implied History. Rather than getting a laundry list of characteristics the Reader is introduced to a character through the character's interactions with her peers and surroundings. And it's the character's peer group that can be such a window into her personality.

Learning about a character through the responses of her peers can be a rich and illuminating experience. I enjoy it much more than a random thought tangent by the character or simple narrative. As with all the tools of writing the technique must be applied judiciously and with an eye to craft but oh the joy when it is done well.

I am now exploring this idea of Implied History in my writing. It's harder than it sounds but very rewarding when I feel I've got it right.

Bugger!

Didn't get to my sandwich yet but when doing some online research I found this bit of awesomeness:

In a science fiction novel, if I describe what's on a desk, the reader will use this to figure out the level of technology in the society.

In a mystery novel, if I describe what's on a desk, the reader will understand that one of those objects is a clue.

In a literary novel, if I describe what's on a desk, the reader will understand it to be a metaphor for the protagonist's mental state.

- James D. Macdonald, discussing Reading Protocols, 6 Apr 2009