I always roll my eyes at writers that advertise themselves as having a PhD. I certainly wouldn't hire them and I think they are being very misleading.
You see, not all majors have a PhD as their terminal degree and writing is one of them. If you want to be a creative writer, you get your Master's degree. What this means is that people who advertise themselves as writers with a PhD, either do not know what they are talking about or have a PhD in something else - such as business or biology - and then let people assume that their PhD is in writing.
You may be thinking - but if I am writing a fiction book like Jurassic Park, wouldn't I want a biologist or paleontologist with a PhD helping me? Uh... no. I have a B.S. in biology - for that degree, I needed to take all of two writing courses at a whopping 6 credit hours. I have read a lot of biology journals - let me tell you, it shows in their writing. I have also taken numerous biology exams where I wished the teacher had taken at least enough writing courses to create coherent questions.
After a biologist gets a Bachelor's Degree, they never have to take another writing course again. They will be doing a lot of writing on their thesis and dissertation, but they can hire someone like me for content editing to help them. In fact, there are many teachers who recommend their graduate students do this because they do not have basic coherent writing skills.
For the record, I have taken more than the required writing courses. I took creative writing, two fiction writing courses and two literary/play analysis courses. But that is why I have two undergraduate degrees with 256 credit hours and no masters degree (sigh). At this point in my life, I would like to get a Master's degree in creative writing, but I have to pay off my college loans first - 256 credit hours is expensive to say the least.
Wednesday, November 27, 2013
Sunday, November 24, 2013
Characterization
Flat characters are black and white. When we read a story with flat characters, we walk away unsure of what makes that character tick.
The novel I am editing right now actually explains something about each character when we first meet them. We learn a little of their background and what motivates them. I do not agree that everybody should do this, but for this particular novel, it works.
Now, just telling me that your character is motivated to find the pirate's gold, or to marry the woman, or to kill Dr. Michner, is not characterization. To make your characters real, you have to know what they eat (and don't eat), what they read, what they wear. You also need to know why they do the things they do. Are they struggling to be famous? Are they trying to get out of a bad relationship?
You as the author need to know everything about your character. You do not need to tell me everything about him. Unless something interesting happens in the bathroom - I do not need to know about it as a reader. We all have to use it, and for the most part there is very little that can happen that is exciting in there. And if something interesting happens in there, the reader better know why or find out sometime in the book.
In addition to understanding your character, you need to make him or her logical. You can have a good character, who helps little old ladies across the street and rescues puppies but works as a hitman - as long as you justify his behavior. If you don't - if your character is motivated and does things strictly because (a) you're the author and you said so and/or (b) he or she has to do it or it will ruin your plot - the character will be flat. As a reader, I want to know why the guy is a hitman if he is rescuing little old ladies and puppies on the side.
If I were writing a book like that, my hitman would have been abused alongside of his sister as a child, because he loved his sister, he always stood up for her - hence anything that is weak he helps and cannot kill. However, since he was abused, he is challenged by taking out the capable and competent. I would not tell the reader this in the story, I would show him or her. I would have the hitman talk about his sister in ways that are loving. I would have him get angry whenever he is told what to do, and I would throw in a plot twist right around the climax where he is sent to kill someone and discovers the person is a blind, helpless, female.
When I write, I become my characters. I like to know everything about them and then I write from their perspective. Perhaps this is because I was originally trained to be a method actor before switching my concentration to costuming halfway through my theatre degree.
P.S. The few the number of main characters, the easier it is to know them. Once you get to six characters, you will generally begin to transpose one character on another one.
The novel I am editing right now actually explains something about each character when we first meet them. We learn a little of their background and what motivates them. I do not agree that everybody should do this, but for this particular novel, it works.
Now, just telling me that your character is motivated to find the pirate's gold, or to marry the woman, or to kill Dr. Michner, is not characterization. To make your characters real, you have to know what they eat (and don't eat), what they read, what they wear. You also need to know why they do the things they do. Are they struggling to be famous? Are they trying to get out of a bad relationship?
You as the author need to know everything about your character. You do not need to tell me everything about him. Unless something interesting happens in the bathroom - I do not need to know about it as a reader. We all have to use it, and for the most part there is very little that can happen that is exciting in there. And if something interesting happens in there, the reader better know why or find out sometime in the book.
In addition to understanding your character, you need to make him or her logical. You can have a good character, who helps little old ladies across the street and rescues puppies but works as a hitman - as long as you justify his behavior. If you don't - if your character is motivated and does things strictly because (a) you're the author and you said so and/or (b) he or she has to do it or it will ruin your plot - the character will be flat. As a reader, I want to know why the guy is a hitman if he is rescuing little old ladies and puppies on the side.
If I were writing a book like that, my hitman would have been abused alongside of his sister as a child, because he loved his sister, he always stood up for her - hence anything that is weak he helps and cannot kill. However, since he was abused, he is challenged by taking out the capable and competent. I would not tell the reader this in the story, I would show him or her. I would have the hitman talk about his sister in ways that are loving. I would have him get angry whenever he is told what to do, and I would throw in a plot twist right around the climax where he is sent to kill someone and discovers the person is a blind, helpless, female.
When I write, I become my characters. I like to know everything about them and then I write from their perspective. Perhaps this is because I was originally trained to be a method actor before switching my concentration to costuming halfway through my theatre degree.
P.S. The few the number of main characters, the easier it is to know them. Once you get to six characters, you will generally begin to transpose one character on another one.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
Looking for Inspiration in all the Wrong Ways
Like most writers, I find inspiration at the library. On my latest visit, I was browsing the poetry section and noticed a book entitled People of Walmart. When you see a book like that in the poetry section, you immediately wonder what in the world it is doing in the poetry section (some may also wonder what I was doing in the poetry section since I was researching Hanoverian England and specifically went to the library looking for a book entitled Taste: The Story of Britain Through its Cooking). I could not resist my curiosity and began glancing through the book.
This book is very wrong. One of the lines in the disclaimer states: "We are not responsible if [after reading this book]...you have the sudden urge to... clean your eyes with bleach..." Yes, it is that wrong.
I began reading this book captivated, telling myself that I in no way could bring this book home where not only would it go on my library record for the NSA to know I checked it out, but I would also have no guarantee that my children would not accidentally pick it up and glance through it themselves. However, it was close to closing time and so, I had to check it out... The librarian agreed with me that (1) the book is just wrong and (2) it is nearly impossible to put down once you open it. I justified my voyeurism into the wrong world of Walmart shoppers by saying I would have to make a blog post about it.
Hey, if pictures and stories about the wrong people who shop at Walmart inspire you to write a better historical romance, this is definitely the book for you... Taste is pretty good too, but there is nothing wrong about that book - except maybe the color picture of the lady skinning a rabbit.
This book is very wrong. One of the lines in the disclaimer states: "We are not responsible if [after reading this book]...you have the sudden urge to... clean your eyes with bleach..." Yes, it is that wrong.
I began reading this book captivated, telling myself that I in no way could bring this book home where not only would it go on my library record for the NSA to know I checked it out, but I would also have no guarantee that my children would not accidentally pick it up and glance through it themselves. However, it was close to closing time and so, I had to check it out... The librarian agreed with me that (1) the book is just wrong and (2) it is nearly impossible to put down once you open it. I justified my voyeurism into the wrong world of Walmart shoppers by saying I would have to make a blog post about it.
Hey, if pictures and stories about the wrong people who shop at Walmart inspire you to write a better historical romance, this is definitely the book for you... Taste is pretty good too, but there is nothing wrong about that book - except maybe the color picture of the lady skinning a rabbit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)