Do Some Character Shopping
As writers commit to writing and further admit that no matter what their day job may be, they are writers to the core – several changes occur. One of those changes is a compulsive need to people-watch. We know that we’re doing this so that we can observe behavior, mannerisms, and everything there is to absorb about people so that when it comes time to add dimension to our characters, we can make them realistic and believable – people with whom the reader can identify, sympathize, flaws and all.
One of my favorite places to get ideas for characters is Wal-Mart. Now, before you start throwing flames my way, let me say this: I am in no way demeaning that store or the people who frequent it. The reason that I like this particular store is because everyone shops there. If you go to a trendy mall, you’re only going to see a particular type of people at that mall. If you go to a salvation army store, the breadth of economic bracket of the typical consumer there is also going to be limited.
But, at Wal-Mart, you see everybody in one place – everyone from people on food stamps to a guy who drove up in a Benz. You’ll see mentally challenged people there with their case workers, struggling to maintain a hold on their independence and dignity in a world that shuns and degrades them. Single mothers (teenage or otherwise), bachelors, college students, parents with eight kids trying to save a buck here and there on the essentials, and of course, that guy who drove up in the Benz who wants to save a few bucks on the HDTV he’s putting in his 5th guest room.
If you want a reader to be able to sympathize and empathize with your characters, then you need to be able to do the same with actual, living, breathing human beings. People from different walks of life as you, people with problems you can’t possibly imagine, people with advantages you know you’ll never have.
What I’ve found really rewarding is going into a Wal-Mart and just watching, observing. Take a look around you, but not that cursory glance you normally give that is filtered with the blinders of your past experiences and your own preconceptions. Take the blinders off and look around you with fresh, objective eyes: the eyes of a reader waiting to be guided, thrilled, excited.
Take a look at the woman pushing the cart with her kid in it. What do you think her daily life is like? Is she happy? What do you think she daydreams about while she pushes that cart through the grocery aisles? What does she want out of life and what’s preventing her from getting it? Asking yourself these questions and filling them in with complete fiction is a great way to build your characters. If the fictional backstory you build for these people fits what you’re looking at, then it might also fit scenes you write for such characters.
Places like Wal-Mart (as well as thousands of other good places to people-watch) are endless fountains of ideas for characters. So, the next time you’re stuck looking for ideas for new characters or the ones you have lack dimension, then just get in the car and do some character shopping.
Lessons Learned From Another Rejection
The other day I got an e-mail rejection back from a publisher who was doing an anthology of stories all centered around a common theme. I’d submitted my story a while ago and recently received an e-mail saying that my story had made the short list. So how did I go from the short list to the the rejection pile?
I could sit here, comfortably shielded behind the walls of my blog, and rant and rave about the injustice of it all – how dare they reject my story? What’s wrong with those people? Don’t they know good fiction when they see it? I could do all of those things, but I won’t. I deserved the rejection.
The rejection letter from these folks was nice enough to tell me that my story was both interesting and well-written, but because of the overwhelming response to the call for stories, I just didn’t make the cut. Cue the scene with high-school-me standing on the edge of the soccer field while teams are called, all sad and dejected as I get picked last. So, if my story was both interesting and well-written, then what did I do wrong?
It all comes down to the word interesting. I thought about it and read through my story last night and the reason for the rejection was clear as a bell. I actually told my wife that it probably only made the short list on the merit of the writing, because the plot was absolutely terrible.
Sure, I opened the story with a bang, leaping right into the action. I had very little exposition, only sprinkled into the action in the cleverest of places. The story read quite quickly and, as the letter said, was actually written pretty well. The problem was with the plot. The story is about this woman who, after losing her mentor in an accident, suddenly defies the city leadership to go off and save a group of people she’s never met. She even uses her powers to fight her people just to save the strangers. While there is motivation in the story that makes her actions (mostly) believable and justified, there’s something missing. Can you spot it? Can you say antagonist? I just knew you could…
I went through the story again. The cave-in at the beginning that kills her mentor was random chance, so we can’t blame that on an antagonist. The city leadership is partially there as an antagonist, but they never directly oppose her actions, the protagonist just kind of cuts them off in traffic, as it were. The antagonist(s) would have gone from point A to point B with or without the presence of the protagonist. As we say in the software business, that had a bad smell. The result is a bit of conflict, some (well-written?) action, but again, there’s none of that obvious, crucial opposition that should be there.
It gets worse. I know, I couldn’t believe it either when I read it. I kept asking myself, “What the hell was I thinking?” The confrontation, the climax that is supposed to take the reader out of the middle of the story and throw them, gripping the story with newsprint-covered thumbs, into the ending, was nonexistent. The protagonist runs away from the admittedly deflated antagonists. She gets rescued, and then flees her rescuers when she finds out they want to put her in a lab somewhere. Even here, when given the chance to turn these people into truly confrontational antagonists, I left them flaccid and ineffectual as true sources of opposition.
So my story may have been well-written, but in terms of plot and structure, it was a complete failure. It might have been interesting to follow the protagonist through her various adventures, but it wasn’t compelling. People reading the story didn’t care, they didn’t have an uncontrollable desire to keep turning the pages; that need to see what’s lurking behind the next page because the opposition is doing it’s job – hurling obstacle after obstacle in front of a protagonist about whom the reader truly cares.
Had I to do it all over again (and I will), I would have made the cave-in at the beginning caused by the city leadership, through their own reckless endeavors. When she confronts them about it, she discovers all kinds of horrible things the city’s leaders have been planning to do, including possibly destroying the city itself to satisfy their own greed. She threatens to tell the citizens of the city about what they’re doing, and they throw her in jail. She then escapes and, … you get the idea.
By making it damned obvious, as obvious as a hammer to the face, who the antagonists are, the conflict is easy to spot. By amping up the level of conflict, increasing the danger, the stakes, and the consequences, the reader cares more about the outcome. With all this conflict around the protagonist, I can weave in exposition and character development in how she deals with the obstacles to further draw the reader in, make them care about her and sympathize with her. Had I written the story this way the first time, I still may have been rejected, but the response from the editors might have been that the story was compelling or better but they still didn’t have room.
To me, a rejection isn’t a reason to quit or a reason to wallow in self-pity (though I did that for a couple hours). It’s a reason to look back at the work I produced with a different, more objective eye. I can look at it and see all of its shortcomings as if someone had circled them in yellow highlighter. The next time I write a short story, I will make sure the obstacles are far more hard-hitting, the antagonists are far more antagonistic (har har), and rather than settling for interesting, will strive for can’t put it down.
To finish this up, I’ll quote Thomas Edison:
I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work
Think of each rejection not as a rejection, but a little reminder that you can learn from the experience and use it to make your next submission better.
Short Story, “On the Rocks”, Published
Today I got a copy of the anthology, Dead Worlds: Undead Stories, A Zombie Anthology, Volume 5.
This book contains a wealth of raw, deadly, zombie excitement and I’m pleased to have my short story, “On the Rocks”, in this collection of tales of the walking dead. I’m not really sure what prompted me to write a zombie story considering the novel I’m working on falls clearly into the fantasy genre. However, when I was a kid and would write short stories for the pure fun of it, without worrying about publishing or agents or editors, the zombie story was a tried and true favorite.
As I sat back and flipped through the book to see how the story turned out in print, it took all of 10 seconds before I started burning the pages with a laser-focused eye of criticism. I noticed every single edit failure. I noticed where I should have changed a phrase, where the dialogue was awkward, where some of the descriptions were just plain absurd. There are also some whitespace problems with the printed edition, and I’m pretty sure they came from my RTF file (yes folks, I hate MS Word as though it is my very own antagonist – always getting between me and my goals!).
The normal, human side of me can look at the story and think, “Say, that’s a pretty cool story about creating zombies with a computer virus!”. However, that part of me is usually very suppressed. I rarely let him come out and play. I’m sure all authors are like this – you spend what seems like an eternity editing a piece, you submit it, and then when you finally get to see it in print, its like someone has taken a big bold highlighter to everything you should have changed before you submitted it.
My personal take-away from this: After I think the piece is ready to submit, I’m going to leave it on disk and walk away for at least three days. Then, I will come back to it and edit it one more time. Then, I will walk away for one more day, then come back and edit it again. Remember, all of these revisions are after I think the piece is print-worthy and has been through the usual multi-round editing phases.
I’m not trying to trash the story, I’m really pleased that it has been published and am excited to produce more short stories for other venues and other genres, but I have learned a valuable lesson that what I think has been edited enough has at least 3 more revisions before it’s ready to be submitted. The other lesson I have learned is that no matter how good my story is, I will always find fault with it and I just need to learn to accept that.
Anyway, I hope you buy the book and enjoy the story!
Mourning the Loss of Identity
When I was young (like 10-ish), I got my first computer. It was on this computer that I learned how to create software. I had always been interested in computers and that interest blossomed into a full obsession during high school, college, and pretty much to this day. When I was a kid, everyone naturally assumed that I would go into a field involving computers. None of the people that know me now and knew me when I was a kid are in the least bit surprised that I ended up as a computer programmer.
Also when I was young, I was really into writing stories. I wrote stories on my mother’s old blue Smith Corona type writer until she couldn’t stand the sound of the hammers smashing anymore and had to confiscate the thing. I went to summer school just so I could take the creative writing classes. When I got to college, my first year there I took creative writing, introduction to science fiction, greek mythology, and philosophy. Doesn’t sound like the kind of stuff a computer science major would be taking, does it? Sure, I also took Physics and Calculus and Linear Algebra and Discrete Math and a bunch of computer programming classes. I even ended up as a TA/exam proctor for a lower level computer science class.
As far back as I can remember, everyone expected me to go into computers. They certainly had good reason, I can say without ego that I’m incredibly good at what I do, among the best. I have presented at programming conferences, user groups, and written and co-written 14+ books on computer programming, some of which have ended up as dog-eared bibles on the desks of developers. Over the past 10 years, I have made it my goal to be among the top computer programmers in the world. So what’s the problem then? Why blog about this? The problem is that I have never been truly satisfied at any “day job” that I have ever had. Sure, there have been really great jobs, but even then those began to seem unsatisfying. I used to think it was because the job was getting boring (and sometimes it was). But now I realize that there was a deeper cause to my unhappiness at work.
I didn’t want to work in a cubicle building stuffy, boring computer software all day long. Especially when it felt like there wasn’t a single creative step in the process of building this software. I wanted-needed- to build, create, let my mind free and imagine worlds and people and events that stimulated my imagination. The most fun I’ve ever had programming was when I was building MUDs (Multi User Dungeons/Dimensions) – big, expansive, text-based worlds that let players roam around and solve puzzles, complete quests, and kill things in classic “infocom” style. I got to use the creative and analytical sides of my brain at the same time.
This past October, I decided that I’d had enough. I was done being a computer programmer. I made the mental switch to believe in the old adage that I am not my job. I forced myself to admit that I was a writer and that I was merely paying the bills with my job as a computer programmer. I was no longer a programmer, but instead a writer who knows how to write computer software. It was amazing what a difference that simple change in perspective made on my life. I have been “present” more in my life in the past few months than I have in the past few years. Not only that, but I’ve got a short story coming out in a published anthology soon, I’m writing a few more stories for other anthologies, and I’m finally moving forward on my fantasy novel with real, measurable progress. It’s amazing what a difference a little change in perspective and priority can make.
Part of me mourns the loss of my previous identity. Part of me feels guilty every time I choose to ignore some blog post about a new piece of software. Part of me feels the tug of stress and anxiety when a new development tool or platform comes out. The old me, the one obsessed with being one of the best coders on the planet, would rush off and absorb this new technology to the exclusion of all else – family, friends, responsibilities, hygiene. Now, I feel the tug and am aware of the call but I don’t answer it. I have decided that I don’t need to obsess about my career as a software architect. I have decided that because I just don’t obsess anymore. I will still bust my ass for my employer and give them 100%, I just won’t spend my nights and weekends obsessing about every new thing that comes along.
I now know what makes me happy. I know what I need. I know who I am.
I am a writer, for all the good and bad that entails.
Learning the Chords
I once had a college professor for a creative writing course who told us that great writers were born that way. The rest of us mere mortals could only hope to strive for mediocrity with enough practice and effort. Up until recently, I believed this pile of rubbish and have even taken it to heart. I’ve been convinced that if I can’t naturally produce great novels just by sitting down and writing, then I must be one of those writers doomed to hope for mediocrity. Writers are already prone to perfectionism and self-loathing, so adding additional self-deprecating baggage onto the burden we bear does no one any good.
I was thinking about this and suddenly came to the conclusion that my college professor was an idiot. First of all, this same professor “taught” us that using said as a default attribution is a bad idea and taught us a whole bunch of other things that an editor recently told me were all wrong. I am now in the process of unlearning all the garbage I was taught by this particular professor.
When I was a kid I remember taking one of those aptitude tests, the ones designed to tell you, based on your scores, what sort of future career you to which you might be suited. This test told me that I should pursue a career in “sanitation”. That’s right, the aptitude test told me that I should be a garbage truck driver. The moral of the story: I’m done letting other people tell me what I can and cannot do.
I firmly believe that if you have that raw spark (neurosis?) within that makes you a writer, then you can hone your craft, learn your tools, and produce great fiction. I think it is foolish and the greatest form of hubris to think that one can be a writer and never once pick up a book on how to write.
Imagine a musical genius whose instrument of choice is the guitar. The man can hear songs in his head that are absolute gems, pure musical perfection. Now, ask that musical genius, who has never lifted a guitar, to go and play the songs in his head. With the exception of a few savant types, this musical genius is going to struggle to play “Happy Birthday” on the guitar, let alone the complex songs in his head. He needs to know how to use the tool, he needs to learn the chords.
Knowing that, in the heavy metal genre, an A chord with the distortion cranked up will make your audience want to punch stuff (a good thing) is essential if you plan to compose heavy metal songs. You wouldn’t know that, regardless of your level of creativity, if you didn’t know all of the chords, how they sound, and the emotions they produce.
The same is true for a writer. We can’t create a page turner without knowledge of plot and structure. We can’t make readers cry without knowledge of characters and character bonding. We can’t make readers so immersed by our fictional world that they ignore the pot of boiling water and the pets with full bladders begging to be let out unless we have a mastery of plot, structure, characters, description, setting, dialogue, and every other tool in the box.
So I picked up a bunch of books on how to write. I’ve already read a few, including those by Stephen King and David Morrell, but these books were down and dirty technical manuals for how to convert raw inspiration into truly readable fiction. I must admit that I ate quite a bit of humble pie in reading those books. Rather than being upset about it, I ordered about 10 more books. Every speck, every tiny granule of knowledge that I pick up teaches me to better hone my stories. The end result is a work of fiction that is not only more fun to read, but much more likely to be published.
So, to summarize: You can’t create music on the guitar without knowing the chords. You can’t create good fiction without knowing the techniques available to writers. Learn your Chords and your readers will thank you for it.