4 books

Tonight I can't sleep, so I'm going to blog a little randomly. (Trying to distract myself. Not sleeping really makes me annoyed)

I have 4 books out at my bedstand right now. It's a little strange for me; I usually finish one then start another. But different things came up so I now have four going. The first one I started out of a campaign to read all the unread books on my bookshelf. They're aren't many, I only buy books that I truly love. So the unread books are all hand-me-downs. It's a spiritual book about overcoming negative self-image. I guess it was boring me because I'm not having major problems with my self-image right now.

The second one I started is the autobiography of Harpo Marx. My family and I LOVE the Marx brothers movies. I read a biography about the whole family a couple years ago called “Monkey business” (A stolen title from one of their movies). I've never enjoyed a nonfiction book so much. This autobiography though got a little boring once Harpo got past describing his childhood. I'm sure I'll come back to this; both of my parents said it's a very good book. Maybe I got bored because I already read a biography of their lives.

The third one I started because I was visiting home from college, and had forgotten the Harpo Marx book at my apartment. “The Outcast of Redwall” My sisters and I grew up on the Redwall series; it was our first great passion in reading. My older sister used to read outloud to us younger two during car rides. I haven't read the Outcast for myself before in fact. Brian Jacques (RIP, sniff) was a great writer. But like I mentioned before, he tends to use all the same characters with new names, and all the same plot elements with slight variation. I don't think I'll get around to reading all 17 of them. My favorite is Mariel of Redwall. (I had a copy of this one. My mom sold it by mistake)

The fourth book I actually haven't started yet. My roommate suggested it and I want to read it before she gets annoyed. “Emotional Purity” I've read some about the concept before in other books but I haven't read it in a book on it's own. It's short. Should be good.

My expected route:

Finish “Outcast”, go to “Emotional Purity”, back for Harpo Marx, and (maybe) finish Negative Self-image.

Characters: quirks & personalities

So. Characters. What makes them so special?

I've noticed a trend lately. The “howcanImakethischaractercool?” trend. Where authors give their characters unique and important traits so that they stand out.

Now, first my disclaimer. There's a balance needed here. Like I said in the last post, no one wants to read about Plain Jane going through the same stuff in every book. We turn to stories, especially fiction, so we can live out something that is unlikely to happen in real life. We like to see characters who become better versions of us.

However, please don't throw around unique traits just to make your character stand out. Normal people in real life are all unique and interesting once you get to know them. It should be the same with characters. If you have to convince us of their uniqueness I will doubt your ability as a writer.

Has anyone read the Bloody Jack series?

I have to admit, the first book was good. Orphan girl (Jacky) pretends to be cabin boy and goes on highseas adventures. She's a good liar. She small and agile. And she gets abandoned on an island. Okay. A little over-done and farfetched, but still. It was a good, well-made story. One of my favorites, in fact.

Then the sequels started coming out, and like the proverbial downhill snowball, number of the character traits and speed with which they're gained boggles the mind.

She can paint beautifully. She can sing. She can play violin. She can dance. EVERY boy character falls in love with her. She can fight. She can race horses. She can lead armies. She can start riots. She can learn languages. The king wants her head. She meets Napoleon. Gets kidnapped by pirates.

It just goes on. She gains enough personality traits that we start wondering if she's even one person or if she has multiple personality disorder.

It's too much. We don't believe in this girl. She's superman. Not like me at all. I can't relate, I can't “go there” with her.

Sometimes there's a different problem. The characters don't have too many quirks. Its just that the “unique things” are kind of obvious.

I used to do Role Playing Games. Okay admit it, most aspiring young writers used to write on forums, back in the days before blogging.

One of the forums I frequented did fanfiction of the Redwall series. (Those books are great, by the way). The world of the book involves mice, hedgehogs, otters, and other woodland creatures instead of people. They go on adventures and there's usually an epic battle at the end.

In the RPGs, each writer would first introduce their character. Every person inevitably included atleast one of these traits:

the tallest, the shortest, the youngest, all black, albino, a creature never before used in Redwall, carries an unusual weapon, has a strange accent, strange markings, scars, or missing ear.

Not one RPG writer could create a “unique” character without these overly used traits.

Creativity, my friends. Where has it gone?

To grow in our lives

Let's keep going on the topic of characters, because they are interesting. It's important to have good characters because, by and large, characters are the reason that readers read books. We feel we have a connection with these people, unreal as they might be. Like a friend, we seek to seek their companionship, hope for their welfare, agonize in their struggles, and watch their development.

Development is a very important part of good characters. If the main character has not changed, for better or for worse, by the end of the story, then essentially the reader has gained nothing. It's also unrealistic, because life is full of changes. So unless you are writing a story that's about the character's unwillingness to change while the world changes around them, then we'd like to see some progress.

Readers want to see change because it reflects the reality of our own lives. We change, the world changes around us. Most people have a natural, innate hope that they are growing and improving, that they are gaining things as they progress through their lives. We want to know that we aren't just “going through the motions” everyday, that there is something more to it. Consequently, we would like to see the same thing in our books. In fact, you might say that that's the greatest thing that a fiction book could offer: the chance for us to see in a snapshot the growth in a life, for our own edification.

Only poorly made characters will not have any flaws. (We don't like to see perfection; it doesn't reflect us or our reality either). The essential flaws of the characters should be worked on throughout the book, resulting in the character either overcoming, or failing to overcome them. In either case there is a conclusion: happy or sad.

The best antagonists will often deal with change too; they usually become better people or worse people by the end of the story. Their flaws may lead them to become “better” bad people. Again, the reader likes to see this because it indicates progress. We have gotten somewhere by reading.

Naming your Character

Characters. They are the heart and soul of a book. They are what brings readers back and attaches them to the book. The reader should feel that the main character(s) is a close friend, or an extension of themselves.

The beginning of this relationship is when the reader first “meets” the character. First impressions are just as crucial as in real life. What is the character doing that day? What are they wearing? What are they thinking? These details will help the reader make judgments on the character that will guide their understanding of the rest of the book.

Of course, the first thing the reader will see is the character's name. There's something going on these days where authors are fighting hard to find new and interesting names. Out with the old, in with the new. Away with the commonplace!

This is leading to some problems.

Mellimeldisiel stepped out of her bedroom and yawned. She called her friend Aphaderuiondur so they could gossip about Maidhfinden before school.

Names like this trip up a reader. Just as it doesn't flow off the tongue nicely, it doesn't flow from the brain easily either. It slows down the reading.

Worse yet are the names with the crazy symbols.

Voronwë

T 'ealc

Sh-kyn'dra

If you're going to put in a crazy name, or one that uses a phonetic pattern unlike English, please explain how it should be pronounced. Trying to read an entire book without knowing how to pronounce a name is like repeatedly tripping over a brick.

One final point is that character's names should fit them. Personalities go with names, exemplify names, embody names. They should go together.

In the books The Hunger Games, the main character is Katniss Everdeen. This name sounds soft, quiet, sweet. But the character, we find out, is supposed to be tough, independent, and bad-ass. The contradiction is a constant annoyance.

Choosing a story

I want to say a few things about the author's choice of book topic (meaning the story or the plot). There aren't many things I can say about this, because obviously, different genres and content will appeal to different audiences. That's why authors are told to write with their “audience in mind”.

Well, actually I'm going to follow that tangent first. I've never really cared for the idea of gearing a book towards a particular audience. Obviously, when dealing with children's literature or with professional audiences, the author does need to monitor what they write in relation to who is going to read it. But I feel that if a reader finds something good and approachable, that's outside of their normal preferences, then the author has succeeded. The author should feel the freedom to write what they want. As long as it's being read and enjoyed, it's working.

One of the author's major goals should be to write something well. But another important thing is to write something that people are going to read.

A topic should not:

• be so complicated that it's unapproachable (many science fiction books fit in here)
• be so broad that it's covered shallowly. We would rather read a sequel and have both be well-written.
• be about teens with the emotional range of a teaspoon
• be an obvious copy of another book. Eragon is said to be awfully similar to LOTR for example. It can be hard not to copy, because some ideas are intrinsic to every story. And some topics, such as vampires, are “trendy” topics that readers want to see more of. Let's just say that it can't be an obvious and blatant copy.

Some readers don't like the idea of “trendy” topics altogether. Books shouldn't be made just to make “fans” happy, but should be written for their own sake as literature.

A topic should:

• be unique in some way. If you're covering something common (Plain Jane enters high school, deals with all the typical high school stuff, “finds herself” by the end) then you need to do something that will help the reader identify this book as different than, therefore better than, the masses of similar stories. (Give Jane super powers. Have her high school blow up. Form a romance between her and a student with disabilities.)
• be understandable. Unique enough that the reader isn't bored, yes, but with enough common ground that the reader isn't totally lost throughout the whole thing.
• be tantalizing. Try to induce that desperate, page-turning, mustreadthisnow feel from the moment the reader picks up the book. Don't have “a must read” on the back, prove it.