Living the Fictional Dream

This has been a great week for me! “The Dragon Thief” was published, and I’ve had two more stories accepted — one by A Thousand Faces and one by Perpetual Magazine. I’m really excited by both of these acceptances. The story I sent to ATF was one that I came up with on the spur of the moment, and ended up working out better than I had ever hoped. The one accepted by PM is a story I wrote quite a while ago and had about dispared of ever finding a home for. And the PM editor said such nice things in the acceptance email. What a great week!

And in honor of what a good week this has been, I’m going to share more links with you. Hopefully, y’all will find something here that piques your interest!

First, if you like flash, you need to go check out “Visions of Hummus-cide” at Bewildering Tales by Stephanie, one of my writing group pals. If you weren’t a hummus-convert after Buffy the Vampire Slayer (”Attack the Mayer with hummus. … He’ll never see it coming.”), this story will bring you over to the cause.

Next up is the mid-June issue of All Things Girl. The update includes part two of their interview with Stephanie Meyer (author of the Twilight series and The Host — which, if you haven’t read them yet, you definitely need to).

And here’s a fun one for all you writers out there — The Random Title Generator. If you’re out of creative ideas, try some of these automatically generated titles on for size. Perhaps you’ll create your next great story after being inspired by titles like “Shakespeare, As Written by a Dinosaur,” “My Friends Call Me Fuzzy Banana,” and “Always Share Your Moonlight”!

Finally, if you want to find out what’s going on in the world of television, you should check out my two favorite TV columnists over at TV Guide’s website: Matt Roush and Michael Ausiello. When Matt recommends something, I always know to pay attention, and Michael always has the latest scoops and a smattering of spoilers. However, apparently Michael is actually leaving TV Guide, so you’ll have to check him out there fast!

And I’m out… for today. Happy clicking!

Last night, Stephen and I watched the last three hours of this season of Lost, and I really enjoyed it — probably more than any episodes of the show since season 1. If you gave up the show during the downturn of season 2, I would highly recommend catching up. It just gets better and better. That said, while this post is going to talk about writing, there will also be some spoilers for Lost, so read at your own peril.

Sawyer has long been one of my favorite characters on Lost. Since we first met him, I was sure the character had something more than a cocky attitude and a charismatic smile. I knew there was a hero underneath, masked by all the hurt he’d endured over the years, starting with what happened to his parents. However, my opinion was met with vociferous resistance in some quarters of my acquaintance, especially because every time he did something “good,” he would soon follow it up with something selfish or his self-serving motives would be revealed in the end.

But in the current season, Sawyer has finally been revealed as a good guy, albeit, reluctantly so. The other people on the island have become his friends (at least some of them), and he actually cares about them. He’s done many things for Kate, just because she wanted/needed him to, proving genuine feelings for her. He left the safe house to rescue Claire in the commando attack. He trailed her into the woods and took care of Aaron when she was gone (I will never forget that scene of him holding the baby in the clearing where Claire disappeared!). When Locke and Ben wanted Hurley, Sawyer wouldn’t let them take him, only backing down when Hurley told him to. Despite antagonism in the past, he refused to let Jack go to the helicopter alone. And when all he had to do was jump on the helicopter and leave, he organized the search party to find Hurley. And his bad-boy-gone-good thing was cemented when he took that flying leap from the helicopter and swam back to the island on the off chance that without his weight Kate (and the others) would be able to make it to the freighter before the helicopter ran out of fuel.

My growing enthusiasm for Sawyer’s character got me to thinking about characters in general. What is it about Sawyer that makes him such a great character (to me anyway), and how can I think about that in light of developing characters that other people would feel that way about? And while I was thinking about all that, I read this article at author Shanna Swendson’s blog. Check out number 3 on her list of why it’s important to talk about TV, which discusses characters who earn their fans love.

This is totally Sawyer — he started out a snarky conman with only a charismatic grin to cover up his selfishness, and over four seasons, he’s become a guy that you can count on in a pinch. I wouldn’t go so far as to call him a reformed bad boy, but his heart has finally been tapped, and watching him you get the feeling that once he cares for you, he’s going to be behind you all the way.

But I think there are other lessons to learn here, too. Stalwart and true heroes and heroines can be good characters, but it’s that flaw that really gives a character oomph (at least for me). The flaws humanize them, give us something to relate to, and, darn it, just make them more interesting. It is way more fascinating to watch someone struggle than someone who makes the “right” choice as a matter of course and without thought. And a story of being redeemed is so compelling.

Who is more interesting? Max or Michael on Roswell? Jack or Sawyer on Lost? Logan or Duncan on Veronica Mars? Luke or Han in Star Wars? The Phantom or the Raoul in The Phantom of the Opera? The list could go on and on. And in my experience, in the fannish communities out there, it is the scoundrel or the reformed bad boy who have the passionate fans.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I like all of those characters I listed. They all have their place — sometimes you need the stalwart hero type. And some of my closest friends eschew the scoundrels and are devoted to the heros. So, in that sense, it’s all a matter of individual taste. But, there is something to be said for writing what one enjoys. If you don’t, it’s more like work, and who would get into this fiction-writing business if they weren’t doing it for the love. No one is doing it for the money (at least, not until they actually land an agent and a six-figure book deal!).

Another thing to consider is that we need all of those types of characters in our arsenals as writers. There are some things that a stalwart hero is just not going to be able to do, and that’s precisely when the scoundrel is needed.

In any event, as a writer, I would love to create a character that makes someone else as excited about a story as Sawyer makes me about Lost — if I can do that, then it’s definitely worth it.

So, if you’re out there and still reading this, which one do you prefer? The stalwart and true hero or the reformed bad boy/scoundrel? Or someone else entirely? Who has you screaming at the TV or paging through the book faster to find the next page where s/he appears?

A cliffhanger irritates me, be it on a TV show or in a book series. The idea behind them is to leave the public wanting more, to make it so they have to come back to the next chapter, the next novel, the next episode, or the next season.

And, I will admit, they work. I can’t tell you how many times I open up a book to read a little before bed, and, before I know it, it’s approaching midnight and I have blown through several chapters at one go. I want to keep going because there is no good place to stop. Every time I get to a section break or the end of a chapter, something dramatic happens, and I have to know what happens next, just like the dramatic happenings right before a commercial break on a TV show.

The worst ones, though, are the cliffhangers between seasons or book releases. Those are the killers, and the ones that I find the most unnecessary. I do understand that the same principle still applies. The writers want to leave the public wanting more, ensuring they will tune in next season/buy the next book in the series.

But it’s so cruel… At least when it’s a TV show, you’ve only got three or four months to wait (cable shows like Farscape aside). I just finished watching this season’s Supernatural, and since the show runners knew they were going to be renewed for next year, they left us with a doozy. That final shot of Dean was haunting, and I have no idea how they’re going to get him out of this one! It’s agony waiting until next fall!

But a book series is even worse! Publishing moves slowly… like a glacier, sometimes. It depends on the author and the publisher, too. Take P.C. Cast’s House of Night series. Crazy things happened to our heroine in the last book, and drama came crashing down hard. Now everything she used to be able to depend on is ripped asunder, evil threatens, and I’m left to wonder until maybe the fall. I’m not sure.

And then there is George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series. The thing has the worst cliffhangers I’ve ever read, and the guy takes forever to finish a book. Multiple year-type forever! If the books weren’t so amazing, I wouldn’t even bother because it’s so frustrating, both waiting for him and waiting to find out if the characters in jeopardy at the end of the last one are going to get out of it OK (and with GRRM, you seriously never know!). The cliffhangers are even worse this time. Because of the length of the last novel, he cut it in half and each half addresses some of the characters. So the characters in jeopardy at the end of A Feast for Crows won’t even be seen again until the book after A Dance with Dragons!!!

I guess that my opinion on cliffhangers is that they are a tool in a writer’s arsenal, but they should be used judiciously. You should keep your readers/viewers in mind. If you’re not going to be able to continue your series, definitely don’t leave it in a cliffhanger. Heck, if you’re not 100% sure you’ll be able to continue (i.e., you don’t have the signed contract in hand), don’t leave it in a cliffhanger. And, you know what? If you’re going to be a year or more between installments, think about giving your readers a break!

As far as the more minor cliffhangers between chapters go, I can see why they are so popular today. In this world where TV, movies, video games, etc., take more of the public’s time and attention away from reading, you have to build that excitement and make them unable to put the book down in favor of something else. If the reader puts the book down, they might never come back again. So, I do understand them for pacing, and it can make a very exciting read at a breathless pace.

Personally, I prefer a mixture of dramatic moments and restful ones, but I fear I am in the minority on that one.

We’re going into summer now… time to cool my heels until the next round of television comes back to relieve me from my post-season-finale-cliffhanger madness. Maybe a few of my favorite book series will come out with new installments to pass the time until fall? Or perhaps I’ll have to find some new ones…

I will say, though, that there are more important things than cliffhangers. They may irritate me (whether or not I understand the purpose, they still irritate me), but there are more important concerns. For me, if I love the characters, the universe, and the story, if the book or show sucks me into that vivid fictional dream and won’t let me go, then I’ll be back. Cliffhanger or no cliffhanger. And if it doesn’t, that’s when I walk away.

Last night, I went with a group of friends to see Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, and after it was over, there were mixed reviews that ran the gamut from loved it to hated it. I went in to the movie with low expectations, having heard only lukewarm reviews thus far, and I was pleasantly surprised.

The movie felt like an Indiana Jones flick. It had the action (exciting, but not too realistic with the blood and gore) and the requisite chase scenes. Indy, though more grizzled than in days of old, still looked dang good in his hat and knew how to use his whip. There were crazy archeologist types and evil armies (this time Communist instead of Nazi). There was an evil woman with a bad accent. There were plenty of bad jokes with that Indy flare. And there was a quest for an ancient artifact that took us to exotic locations. In addition, we had my favorite Indy love interest of all time.

And, in addition to all the classic elements, there were new additions that made the movie unique from its predecessors. There was a spunky kid. The setting and time period were new (the fifties flare was amusing). And the plot about the artifact was definitely new territory for an Indy film. Some people in my group thought the plot about the artifact was too out of this world, too absurd, but to me that is what an Indy film is all about. Tell me that an immortal knight guarding the holy grail isn’t aburd!

Personally, I enjoyed the film. It was an adventurous romp through the classics, but with enough uniqueness to make it stand on its own. I wouldn’t have liked the movie if they’d tried to make it a current-day action flick. I don’t want my Indy tainted with “realistic” violence and gore or hatred and angst. If I’m going to see Indy, I want fun, excitement, and adventure without worrying about how if Indy had really fallen that far he would have broken a limb, or worse! But some of my compatriots felt that it was too over the top, too cliche, not worth the price of admission.

The range of comments got me thinking about stories in general. It reminded me of the dichotomy you often see in genre fiction between genre conventions and new twists.

Some readers, editors, reviewers, etc., don’t like a genre story unless it brings something new to the table. Now, don’t get me wrong. I like new twists as much as the next girl, and reading a sword and sorcery story with an Asian setting and martial arts or a vampire story where the vampires glitter in the sunlight instead of bursting into flames is interesting and memorable. Striving to redefine genre fiction is great!

However, during all this redefining and all this emphasis on the new, I don’t think we should forget the old, the traditional, or the classics. They became classic for a reason, and I believe that stories upholding the genre conventions can be just as enjoyable to read as those that bend and twist them.

And I don’t think I’m alone. Otherwise why would e-zines promising us stories in the same vein as the pulp novels of old be springing up all over the web? Ray Gun Revival, Blazing Adventures, and Big Pulp all claim to publish stories that harken back to the Golden Age of pulp fiction.

But just because you embrace the old conventions, that doesn’t mean a story has to be stale and derivative. There are so many elements that make up a story. The characters, with their own unique motivations and personalities are a big one. As is the plot itself. Watching the new Indy movie was like that for me — it was a new Indy adventure with the classic Indy feel and style. Good fun was had by all.

And think about category romance novels. Yes, a lot of people look down on them, but I’m not one of those people. It takes skill to write a good romance novel. I tried to write one once, thinking it would be an easy way to break into the novel-writing market, and boy was I wrong. I don’t think I got past chapter one.

When you pick up a romance novel, you expect it to have a lead female character and a lead male character who have an instant attraction. Problems will ensue, which keep the characters from getting together. There will be romantic scenes (though not always sex… it depends on what line you’re reading), and in the end, there will be a happy ending. But there are a million ways to take that formula and make it unique. Characters, supporting characters, locations, plots, etc. It takes skill and good writing to pull off a success in that genre. And, there are convention benders in the romance genre, too — nowadays there are so many subgenres, the sci-fi romance, the urban fantasy romance, etc.

Now, don’t take this entry as me being against changing genre conventions or finding that ellusive new twist. It’s not at all! I think a writer who succeeds in that has done a great job with his or her story.

It’s just that I also think there is plenty of room out there for a conventional stories, as well, as long as the writers take the time to breathe life into the conventions and don’t just follow a formula. If you’re going to write golden aged pulp, do it with style, do it with unique characters, give us a fun, adventurous romp. And, in the end, there will be stories out there for everyone.

A working story (short story, novel, or even a movie) has so many components to juggle. There is the beginning hook, of course; an element that gets more than its fair share of attention. After all, you have to have a first line, a first paragraph that kicks butt to draw in the ever-fickle reader.

And it’s true. I’m a very forgiving reader (maybe it’s the writer in me?), but there are occasions where I’ve put the story/book down. For the most part, I finish what I start out of sheer perversity (if I bother to start, I want to know what happens), but there have been occasions that I’ve put down the book or clicked the back button because I was so unmoved that I just didn’t care either way.

With all the pressure on the hook, it can be hard to get started. Only once did a story hook come to me fully formed. Usually, they are the result of much tweaking. I think of that line by Alex in the movie Alex & Emma, “Call me Ishmael. It was the best of times; it was the worst of times. God created the Heavens and the Earth. Can you see why I can’t begin? The giants that have gone before me!”

And then there is the catalyst to consider, followed by that difficult part where you’re walking a tightrope toward the end, balancing between too little information (a confused reader) and too much (a bored reader). And then the climax, which had better be satisfying.

But what about the ending? Sometimes, by the ending, it seems like the focus has been lost. The climax has climaxed, the characters are living happily ever after (or not), and it’s time to get out of there.

The movie 27 Dresses is a good example (if you haven’t seen it and don’t like spoilers, you might want to skip the rest of this entry). I really liked this movie — the characters are great, their emotions are very real and well-founded, and you spend the whole movie just hoping that Jane and Kevin will wake up and realize that they are perfect for each other. Every time Tess pulls another stunt or says something that hurts Jane just a little more, you want her to get her comeuppance. And boy, does she! Even the character of the “other guy,” is a nice guy you can sympathize with (even if he didn’t see the awesomeness of Jane, he was kind, a great boss, and concerned about the environment). The movie gets you into their story, and keeps you going through classic moments (like the bridesmaid’s dress fashion show and the “Benny and the Jets” song and dance), up until the rehearsal dinner showdown.

And then there’s the end. I like that the 27 brides are all there, but the rest of it… ug… so corny. And not in a good way, even for a romantic comedy. I wanted them to get married under the tree in the field where they had the car wreck. I wanted a shot at the reception of them leading the crowd in a rendition of “Benny and the Jets.” I wanted something that left me will happy memories of the couple as the credits rolled. Instead, I got a rather insipid wedding scene which ended with the stellar exchange, “Is it everything you hoped for? No… it’s better.” I really, really like this movie, but that last impression of cheese and cliche is almost enough to ruin it.

That’s something writers need to think about when they craft their stories. The hook draws the reader into the story, and the characters, the plot, the catalyst, the pacing, and the climax keep them there. But the ending… that’s the writer’s chance to make a last impression, something the reader takes with them, something the reader will associate with that writer. If the last impression is good, maybe the reader will be moved to check out the writer’s blog or website to find links to more stories. If the last impression isn’t, chances are, readers might not forget about the writer, but they most likely will not follow up or become fans.

And, really, in today’s market, a group of loyal readers is important. Those are the people who will buy all your books (instead of borrowing them or getting them at Half Price) and read all your stories. Those are the people who will stay with you. Last impressions count!