%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |  This is a continuation of my blogging here at WdC |
|
This will be a blog for my writing, maybe with (too much) personal thrown in. I am hoping it will be a little more interactive, with me answering questions, helping out and whatnot. If it falls this year (2024), then I may stop the whole blogging thing, but that's all a "wait and see" scenario. An index of topics can be found here: "Writing Blog No.2 Index"  Feel free to comment and interact. |
| External Writerings VIII It is again that time of the month when i ask my blog readers to please click on some of these columns in order to help me pay my bills! Music and one film column; some interesting musical choices here. Hope you enjoy. Older songs about telling lies. More recent songs about telling lies. To mix it up, songs about the truth. And this leads to songs about trust. Now songs about being perfect.. Early songs about stopping this time. Middle years songs about stopping. And, finally, modern songs about stopping. And to finish, my favourite films of 1974...50 years ago! Thanks everyone! |
| Update! I have not blog-posted for a few days. And there is a reason! I posted this "Note: Sorry to intrude... but had to let it out. A 12k w..." in the Newsfeed. Well, the demon story is now finished, the YA fantasy is now finished and the cryptid story died. I picked the wrong setting, so I will redo it (keeping only one character) with a new setting and a new PoV... and let it fester in my head until November, and I'll use it for my NaNo story this year! I have also got into the habit of writing something for "Merit Badge Magic" , specifically the special badge. Well, I am (as of now, 2:30pm in the afternoon) 3500 words into a story for it... I just got on a roll!And my monster dictionary will not stop! I found 2 new books (well, really old books) and have added hundreds of words to that as well. So, sorry, but blogging has been the last thing on my mind. I have been asked a couple more questions, so I do have some topics to write about, but personal writing has taken precedence. Sorry. |
| Australian Poetry Problems I have explained in a previous blog entry what Australian Bush Poetry is - "20240127 Australian Bush Poetry" – but, in general, until very recently, Australians have not taken any other form of poetry seriously. Sure, we have some poets like Bruce Dawe and Judith Wright (both very over-rated, in my opinion), but most Australians cannot take poetry that is not bush poetry seriously.And that is because of Ern Malley, The Darkening Ecliptic and Angry Penguins. First, Angry Penguins. This was a literary magazine coming out of Adelaide, but known as one of the highest regarded critically acclaimed magazines in the country. If your work was included in its pages, you were made… amongst a certain type of person who thinks they are cleverer than everyone else and talks a little too loudly at parties. At this time, in the 1940s, its editor was a man named Max Harris, one of the more pompous members of the Adelaide Club. See, unlike the rest of Australia, South Australia, of which Adelaide is the capital, had no convicts. It was completely convict-free, and even had a ban on freed convicts settling in its borders for a few years. This is something which the state is still smug about (and is where I live, so I know). As such, Angry Penguins was the sort of magazine that thought it was above everything else because they were capital-L literature and came from Adelaide. Enter Ern Malley. Or, more to the point, enter Sydney-siders James McAuley and Harold Stewart. They adopted the name Ern Malley and went to a Melbourne publisher with a collection of poems called The Darkening Ecliptic, which was duly published. The Darkening Ecliptic did minimal sales… until Angry Penguins stepped in and gave it the most amazing review. They had no idea that this work was, in fact, a complete hoax, a collection of, to quote the authors, “consciously and deliberately concocted nonsense.” However, a second edition was published with a forward by Max Harris himself, where he called this formerly unknown “mechanic and insurance salesman” one of the foremost poets in Australian history. He also dedicated an entire edition of the magazine to the works of “Ern Malley”. And it might have remained a minor blip… but it did not end there. See, South Australia’s capital, Adelaide, is known as “the City of Churches” because, until the 1970s, it was laughably conservative (despite being the second place in the modern world to give women the vote and first to allow them to stand for parliament). And so, in 1944, the police prosecuted The Darkening Ecliptic and, by extension, Angry Penguins under obscenity charges. This is when the hoax came to light. The stated aim, according to court documents, was to embarrass Angry Penguins and Max Harris. But the case went ahead anyway, as, hoax or not, they had still published what was deemed obscene. The case was a joke. For example, Detective Vogelesang, for the prosecution, found the word “incestuous” indecent despite admitting “I don’t know what ‘incestuous’ means.” One other poem mentioned walking in a park at night; this was deemed obscene because the detective knew what people did in parks. And yet, Max Harris was found guilty of obscenity, fined, and South Australia became a laughing stock for decades. Harris was involved in newspapers when I studied journalism, and I attended a lecture by him; he said he does not regret it as he considers some of the poems quite good (he died in the mid-90s). It is said that the memory of being taken in by such a hoax, and the courts finding it obscene was what led to the state's cultural revolution of the 1970s, where South Australia was the first state to legalise homosexuality, elected a homosexual premier, and then saw the Family Killings, the Truro Murders, and, latterly, Snowtown. South Australia, Australia’s home of creepy and downright terrible crimes. But that is another story for another time. They were also the first place in Australia to recognise Scientology as a real religion. Stupidity… Anywho, this whole debacle some 80 years ago has resulted in the majority of Australians treating anything not bush poetry as a joke, even after all this time. After all, if Ern Malley was a hoax, why not other poets who don’t rhyme and don’t seem to make sense? |
| In Defence Of Professional Wrestling I have been subjected to some vitriol on WdC as of late, and, as is usual in cases like this, things get personal. One thing was that because I like professional wrestling, I must be stupid and so my opinions don’t matter. Well, f*ck you. Professional wrestling is performance art. It involves a lot of pain, a lot of skill and a lot of ability. The stories are as intricate as many movies; the acting is better than a lot of modern “actors” can muster. And it is fun. For me! Yes, I said stories. The matches do not exist in isolation; there is nine times out of ten a reason for them occurring. That might be something sporting, like wanting to get a shot at a tile, personal, like someone abused someone else’s family, or long-term and intricate, like a redemption arc (Randy Savage, WM 3 to WM8, greatest wrestling story ever!). Sometimes they’re stupid – I remember a feud over a shampoo commercial – and sometimes they make no sense, but there is often a story involved. That is why the writer in me loves it. Wrestling can also help the writer; I use it when teaching one of my writing courses. I find it is the best thing to use when helping beginner or not as confident writers with one specific element of writing. Then there’s the, “But it’s all fake!” argument. Umm… you realise movies are fake, right? And most TV shows? Is it because it is in a sporting context? So you think Apollo Creed was really killed by Ivan Drago? At least wrestling admits the results are pre-determined; ask Formula 1 racing, professional boxing, South American soccer and Indian cricket about that and see the embarrassed non-looks you receive. If being fake – and ask my destroyed shoulder, lost tooth and bad back just how “fake” it is; being slammed on concrete, getting hit by a chair, going through a table hurt, like, a lot – is an issue, your poor minds must explode when you watch a superhero movie and see someone fly! Or see a criminal case solved in an hour (plus commercials). Or see the good guys win all the time. It is entertainment. It is written (sometimes even well!) and makes better sense than some TV I've seen recently (*cough*The Acolyte*cough*). It is acted believably for what is presented, moreso than too many 'actors" in movies and TV shows I've seen lately. It is not meant to be the be-all and end-all of sport, and does not pretend to be, unlike nearly every other sport on the planet. And it is rarely boring. Let's ask soccer about that, with a 0-0 scoreline after eighty minutes plus extra time. Yes, I like professional wrestling. A lot. And if you don’t, then I think there might be something wrong with your sense of fun. |
| Using Rare Words Readers of my various Newsfeed posts will notice that I have been putting rare words with their definitions up, mainly to entertain, but also to educate. But that does bring up a question – would you ever use these words? If by “you” you mean “me”, then, yes, yes I would. I have been known to throw a word that really describes what I want but that I am might be the only person since 1856 to have used it in a piece of writing. I have had over a dozen of these words removed (after being questioned) by editors before publication; about four have got through to final print. But that’s me. What about the general, run-of-the-mill writer? Yeah, well, I would probably say it’s not worth it. If you have no goal of publication and it’s just to entertain yourself as much as your readers, then sure, go for it. But if you want publish – no matter the style of publication you go for – then it might make you seem like a smart-arse, a know-it-all git, a right wanker in written work. I know, because I have been accused of all these things. I have a goal to write a story that includes at least one rare word in every sentence, but finding the right idea for it is proving difficult. Anyway, this brings me to the point of this. Why do I put these words forth, and why do I use them? Because I do not want to see words die. Language is mutable, and there are too many words where the definition is changed for no reason except people are idiots and use it wrong (literally, for example), but there are so many wonderful words that we don’t even use, and they could become relics. I am happy to use these old words in the manner in which they were intended. It is also like when I invent words (which I have been known to do, and at least one word I invented has been published!) I make sure it has a good etymological basis so people who look at it think that because it makes sense, it must be real. I am a language gate-keeper, and I admit that. And I will continue to use and let people know about weird and wonderful words. |
| Self-Publishing Addenda Quick one. Some things came up from people regarding my recent post about self-publishing ("20240821 Self-Publishing" ). I did go back and link my entry on hybrid/vanity publishing, which I should have done, but some other points were brought up.First, some commented that I mentioned people who wanted to control their own narrative, but then did not mention them in my list of people for whom self-publishing is maybe the only option. This is because the people I mentioned, and the types of works I mentioned, are when self-publishing is the only viable option in most cases. People who choose to have that control, it is a complete choice. They could well go the traditional publishing route, but choose not to. Having control desires is not a reason why you have to do something. I wanted to look at those for whom it is very probably their only option, which is why I used the word “vital”. Second, some mentioned that I was too hard on self-publishing. I am pretty sure I said I was going to be harsh on it because, for the general writer, I do not see the point. I will say it again: if it is not good enough for a publisher, it is not good enough for the public. Third, it was brought up that publishing screenplays and plays before performance is not done. This is something I was not aware of in the USA, so I need to apologise. In Australia, even for some community theatre groups, the expectation is that the play has been published in book form; I made the assumption this was the case everywhere. I also equated screenplays with stage plays, and that was probably an error as well. I mean, I have sold screenplays to students without it being in book form. Having said that, of a writer wants these works to just be out there for many to read, self-publishing is still the way to go. Fourth, I neglected another form of writing that often needs the self-publishing model to get out into the public – Graphic Novels. While this is a growing market, it is also an area where more and more are throwing their hat into the ring, and so self-publishing, like poetry, is often the only way to get these works into the public sphere. Fifth, another form of book that virtually requires self-publishing: collections of art-work and/or photographs. There is one publisher in Australia who does this, and is not aligned with a university. One! The issue is – and this does affect the self-publisher as well – is that photographs and colour versions of art work cost a lot to print. Traditional publishers are not going to take the risk on something so expensive, so self-publishing really is the only way to go. Finally, it was mentioned that works by children should be self-published, because many trad publishers will not work with minors. In my opinion, I don’t care about the age – if the author has written something people think should see the light of day, then try the market. “But it’s by a kid!” is the rebuttal. If that means it is not very good, then why publish it? Age should not matter; I am a gatekeeper in that regard, and think quality matters. So, some extra comments about self-publishing which I am sure will generate even more vitriol. But I hope I have answered some of the questions the first post created. |
| Self-Publishing INTRODUCTION Okay, I am going to start this by saying that, on the whole, I am not a fan of self-publishing. In my opinion, if my work – if any work – is not good enough for a publisher, then it is not good enough for the public to read. I understand I am trusting their judgment in what works for the public, yes, but that is fine. Now, I know some people just want to put their books out there, want to be in control of everything from advertising to publicity to covers to everything else, and want to get all the money for themselves (after costs). A sense of control in a very tight market. Great; if that is what you want, go for it. My biggest issues with self-publishing come from a vast number of the books I have read that have been self-published: poor editing, and poor stories. Yes, some have been good – in fact, some have been very good – but the majority have been badly written, poorly plotted and nearly all of them badly edited. I am not saying that trad publishers are perfectly presented, because they’re not, nor that their stories are not badly constructed, because some are. But a far higher percentage are better edited and better constructed in a trad sphere than the self sphere. And so the good are tarnished by the greater number of the bad. Then there are the legal repercussions. Publishers have access to legal advice that costs regular people. Not just for portraying someone in a negative light, but also using stuff you do not have the right to use. This can become really messy. ALL OF THIS IS MY OPINION! Self-publishing, however, is far, far better than hybrid/vanity publishing. [Addendum: For my thoughts on vanity/hybrid publishing, please see: "20240530 Traditional v Vanity Publishing" ]What is self-publishing? I suppose I should start with a definition. Self-publishing is when the author pays for everything involved in the production of a book. Simple. However, for this money, they also have complete control over the process. They pay for an editor, a formatter, a cover artist, the ISBN (and associated), marketing, printing the physical copies, formatting as an e-book for various formats, hiring a narrator for an audiobook, etc. Everything is in the hands of the author. If anything goes wrong, it is all up to them. They have complete control. In this day and age of hyper-businesses taking over everything, I can understand wanting to separate themselves from that. Being in control of your own art is freeing. Self-publishing does mean you need a knowledge of how to market, and that you will be forced to do things that will take time away from writing more and working a real job. A number of writers make a decent income from self-publishing, I know that. A few even make a living. Having said all that, more importantly, sometimes self-publishing becomes vital for a writer to get their work “out there.” When is self-publishing vital? There are several types of works and some types of people for whom self-publishing is the only option. If writers self-publish in these circumstances, good on you! Go for it! I know perfectly well that self-publishing is the only way your work is going to see the light of day (ignoring hybrid/vanity). In these cases, I would self-publish as well. Poetry There are so few poetry journals out there that accept unsolicited poems (let alone full manuscripts) it is depressing. Publishers who accept poetry anthologies or even chapbooks are thin on the ground. Too many really good poets do not get an opportunity to ever see their work in print. A poet who wants to have their work available to the public pretty much needs to go the self-publishing route. Plays, Scripts, Performance Work Everything from poetry can be copy-pasted here. Yes, there are more opportunities through community theatre for especially plays to be performed, and for students to make films, and that will result in publication in a lot of cases, but there are still too few opportunities for playwrights (or writers of screenplays) to get their work out into the public sphere. Experimental Writing Trad publishers tend to be conservative in their choice of works. If you write an experimental piece with lots of emojis, for example, or pictures, or in creative non-fiction mixed with fiction, etc. then you are going to be hard-pressed to find anyone who will even read it. Copy-paste poetry here, but know there are even less markets to even think about submitting to in the first place. This is a shame, by the way, because experimental writing is where a lot of newer ideas can come from. This includes the publication of a lot of online stuff; one book I read recently was a person’s entire Twitter history, including comments in response, showing how the platform became toxic. I do understand Twitter (now X) is trying to have it pulped as they “own” her tweets, and she did not get permission from the others whose tweets she included. Again, I say it is a shame, because it could help so many parents recognise when these things begin. (This does show where the legal issues can also come into play for self-publishing.) Family History This is probably the most important use for self-publishing – collating a family history in order for the members of the family to have a record. No publisher is going to want to publish a book with a market of maybe 25 family members. We cannot afford to lose these oral histories, and so this is a time where self-publishing becomes a public service. Niche Non-Fiction That leads onto the next time when it can be vital – a non-fiction work where there are very few people interested in a topic. Now, nowadays a lot of people say, “Why not make a website?” That is because it is becoming more and more common that online information is stolen (not just by AI) and it is far harder to stand out in a sea of billions of websites than on the “for sale” page of a self-publisher, or to show their friends and family and others interested through personalised media and emails. Sometimes the book of the work is a better, more permanent record of the work gone into the research. For example, website hosting companies can go bust, can be hacked, all sorts of things. And after the author dies, websites can fade if money is no longer paid. Mixed language Works with a mixture of languages, especially from authors from south-east Asia, are becoming more common, but trad publishers do not want to deal with different language type-faces and trying to market such pieces. They do not seem to understand how many people are bilingual, or even multilingual, in that region and that books like this reflect the way people speak. These are not language education books, but books written in the patois of a region. They make these peoples feel more included in the world at large. Translations This leads onto translations of works. This is both translating a work from a language into English or vice versa. Lack of publication is especially the case if the non-English language is not a widely used one. I am looking here at Indigenous Australian languages; books written in those have to be self-published because no trad publisher will touch a work with only 100 people who speak it. Anthologies This final one is one that is odd to me, but it is what it is. Unless you already have a name as a short story writer, or have a heap of novels behind you, getting a collection of short stories published is next to impossible. Some mid-sized trad publishers have started doing open calls for short story anthologies; however, if they accept 2 such collections a year, and there’s maybe 20 publishers world-wide doing it, that is only 40 a year. That is hardly going to scratch the surface. In my case, I have had almost 100 short stories published traditionally, of which I have the rights currently to more than 60, and I am struggling to get an anthology accepted. There is also the simple fact that some people are better writers of short works than longer, and so this excludes them from traditional publishing. For whom is self-publishing preferred? Again, in my opinion, there are three types of people who self-publishing would be the best option for. The Sick Or Elderly This is rather morbid, but if someone really wants to see a piece of written work in print, and they may not have a lot of time left, then self-publishing is perfect. They can not only see their work as a real book, but also gift it to people while they are still able, and see the looks on their faces. This has really hit home for me lately, as one of my best friends has cancer with only a 5% chance of survival, and she has been struggling to get one of her books accepted. I am thinking of paying for her to have my favourite of hers (I’ve read and edited them all) self-published, just so she can see it in print before she goes. Her one life goal she has not met is to be a published author; it would be nice for me to do that for her. Marginalised People It is a rather unfortunate effect of the current intolerant society in which we increasingly found ourselves that some members of our society are not afforded the same opportunities as many others. While I understand these sorts of things are not made public for fear of backlash, the following are some of the people I have heard on the publishing grapevine some select traditional publishers will not publish, as it would be seen as supporting them: LGBT+ people; transgender people specifically; Muslims; ex-prisoners/ ex-felons; Australians (seriously); any non-Christian; atheists. How do they know? Because they ask for social media. A lot of publishers will do this in order, as they say, “to see how much you can help with the marketing of your book.” This is a legitimate concern for smaller publishers, and it does make sense; if you have no online presence, how can you help sell your own book in this day and age? However, some publishers do use it for this more insidious reason, and that is something they will not publicise. All they have to say is you’ve been rejected, and that is that. So, for people who fall into marginalised categories, self-publishing could well be their only way into the writing market. No Social Media And this leads on to the last group – people who eschew social media. That is their right, but as mentioned above, many publishers do not like it because they say you cannot help market. The crazy thing is, statistics from the past five years, since COVID, show that the only two social media platforms that seem to affect sales are Instagram and TikTok. Facebook results in selling pretty much only to friends, X is so toxic that people avoid books advertised on the platform, Discord is selling just to members of a server, and the others have very little market influence. But people should not be forced onto what is a nasty, toxic and generally hostile environment just to be published, so with those whose books would only appeal to small to mid-sized publishers, having no social media becomes a valid reason to self-publish. Conclusion To finish, when it comes to general, run-of-the-mill books, fiction and non-fiction, I do not see the reason for self-publishing. I reiterate my statement: in my opinion, if it’s not good enough for a publisher, it’s not good enough for the public. However, as can be seen, there are a lot of occasions when I feel self-publishing is not only the way to go, but possibly the only option available to a writer. And, no matter what: SELF-PUBLISHING IS FAR, FAR PREFERRABLE TO HYBRID OR VANITY PUBLISHING! |
| Reverse Rejection So, I received a book offer this past week. After going through the contract, seeking independent advice and some back and forth, I have decided to reject it. I know what you’re going to say: “WHAT?!?!” (Although long-time readers will note this is not the first time I have done this.) Let me explain. The contract had two clauses I was not happy with that they would not consider changing. Well, it had four clauses I was not happy with. But the other two they were willing to negotiate on. What did they negotiate? I did not want an author photograph anywhere, and I needed to be paid by a means not PayPal (PayPal are evil and nasty and not worth dealing with; they have banned me and won’t tell me why). The other two… One was that they maintain ownership of characters and story. What this means is that the rights to make a film, a graphic novel, even a sequel, is not in my hands, but theirs, and I only get 10% of subsidiary rights moneys. The other was that they maintain all rights in perpetuity. This means that, unless the company goes bust, I have no access to my own work without their written permission. I was concerned about these two, so I reached out to the (free) legal advice available to Australian authors. They told me straight away that this was not a good deal. They confirmed it was not a hybrid (vanity) publisher, and that they did have authors and books available, but that this contract was a bad one. They also cited the 15% royalties I would be getting as below industry standards. So, I refused it. For the record, I will not name the publisher; my blog is public and I dare say they would be a litigious group. I will also not tell you who they are in an email, so please do not ask. But the whole thing with this brief post is to say a simple: be careful. READ YOUR CONTRACTS CAREFULLY! |
| Italics Quick one. I was asked this question recently after giving a review. I thought I’d covered it already, but can’t find it. So, when do we use italics? 1) Titles This I know I’ve covered, and it’s at this entry here: "20240511 Formatting Titles" . It’s technical, yes, I know, but it is all there (including the mistakes I made initially having been fixed…) so that covers using italics in the titles of things.2) Thoughts The standard practice nowadays is that thoughts that reflect exactly what the person is thinking be put in italics. Direct thought, like direct speech. So: I need to get a bigger boat, he thought. This is a direct thought. His exact thoughts are I need to get a bigger boat. But: He thought he needed to get a bigger boat. Here, the thing he is thinking is only reported, like indirect speech. This means italics are not needed. 3) Emphasis Italics can be used to emphasise certain words in a piece of writing. This could be narratively, in a work of fiction, to focus the reader’s attention on something or to clarify what could otherwise be a confusing point, or in a work of non-fiction to pinpoint a key word. Mary would make sure that it was her daughter who became head cheerleader, not Betty’s. A writer does have to be careful not to overuse this, though, because this is most definitely a case where it will diminish its effectiveness. And I have read some works where it feels like every third word is emphasised in this way. 4) Foreign Words Another topic I have also covered in (probably too much) detail: "20240516 Using Foreign Words" .5) When Discussing Specific Words This is starting the very technical side of italics. If we are looking at a word in an etymological sense, then we can either put it in single quotation marks or italicise it, with the latter becoming more preferred. It is unsure where the word boy comes from. It is especially useful when comparing two words. There is a distinct difference between the words premier, meaning ‘most important,’ and premiere, meaning ‘first performance.’ 6) When Discussing An Animal Species In biology – and any time the terms are used – the genus and species (and sub-species) name of a living organism is italicised. The whale shark, Rhincodon typus, is the largest living fish species. Note: the genus has a capital letter while the species has a lower-case letter. The dingo, Canis lupus dingo, is considered the only native placental mammal in Australia. The sub-species also has a lower case letter. And this applies to plants as well: The Swainsona formosa, or Sturt’s desert pea, is the floral emblem of South Australia. Where this becomes curious is where the scientific name for an animal becomes its common name. The only known case is the boa constrictor. This name is used in italics only if referring to the creature in a scientific, taxonomical manner. And, finally, we come to dinosaurs. If the name of a dinosaur is used, and it is just the dinosaur, then it is like any animal. A triceratops attacked the tyrannosaurus. Some will write these names (Triceratops/ Tyrannosaurus) with a capital letter, to distinguish it from a family group (ceratopsian/ tyrannosaur), but there is no consensus on that. But if the full name of the animal is used, it should be italicised. A triceratops attacked the Tyrannosaurus rex. or A Triceratops horridus attacked the tyrannosaurus. or A Triceratops horridus attacked the Tyrannosaurus rex. This also counts when using abbreviations: T.rex. 7) When Discussing Legal Cases The actual names of a completed legal case is italicised. While the case is ongoing, it is not, as the participants could change. This is used when referring to a case for a legal precedent or when discussing cases for future reference. The case of Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark US legal case for its implications concerning desegregation.. It should be noted that in some cases, the US will use vs. instead of v. for versus (against). Either is correct. In Commonwealth cases will often be R. v. Other/s. This indicates the government is the prosecuting body. R. stands for Regina (queen) or Rex ((king) and signifies that it is in the name of the Commonwealth monarch that a case is being persecuted. In some cases, the v./vs. is not italicised, though this seems to be going out of fashion in recent years. ADDENDUM – Inverse Italics If an entire sentence is in italics, any words that would normally be in italics are in normal type. It’s like a negative picture image. Well, he thought, I’m here at the cinema, so I might as well watch Deadpool And Wolverine and not waste my time. I hope that covers everything! |
| Personal Foibles In Writing This is something that a beta reader pointed out to me years ago, and it was brought home to me recently by a new beta reader that I still have not stopped this. Okay, what is this? It is little things that come across in my writing, things that I do in my writing that are everywhere. Not just in individual stories but across all works. And it might be something other writers could look at as well. This will cover three aspects: language, character, story beats. Now, some say this is a writer’s style. I mean, fans all know Stephen King has a problem with technology and machinery, likes childhood trauma affecting adulthood and uses a lot more parentheses than most other writers. His style. However, some things could become problematic. Trebor Martis’ habit of making all his villains, no matter the story, gay, bisexual, effeminate or the like springs to mind. Ernest Cline’s obsession with the 1980s, despite his work reading like he googled it and didn’t actually live it (I lived it; it is so obvious he was on the outside looking in at the time), informs his work thus far. It says more of the writer than should be there. So, I am going to point out some of my own foibles and writing quirks in the hope that it can make readers look at their own work and see what they do. 1) Language So, I have two language issues and there are two more I have managed to overcome. I have a habit of my characters muttering or murmuring a lot. I fall back to one of those two words way too much, and it is something I need to look at. I also start too many sentences with “And…” It is my way of avoiding “Suddenly…” and “Then…” but I do overuse it, and I know it. In the past I used to use the ellipsis way too often. I found one story I wrote in the mid-1990s, and every single paragraph seemed to have at least one. I do still use them, but very sparingly. Not at the end of every paragraph. I also used to use the em-dash way too often. As a beginner writer, I was told that the use of parentheses in fiction should be kept to a minimum (this has subsequently been reinforced by many editors and publishers I have worked with, Stephen King notwithstanding), so I replaced them with the em-dash clause. I have found better ways to introduce these clauses and this exposition into my stories. On another note, I have been told I use too many adverbs. But I think these people only mean “-ly” adverbs, because adverbs are so much more ("20240513 Adverbs" will explain what adverbs are). Anyway, I disagree, and so far, only one publisher has removed any.2) Character Before I begin, character foibles in writing are often born of the prejudices of the writer, and the life they have lived and experienced. So, I have 2 character foibles, and one more I think I’ve overcome. My first is that all my characters tend to be university educated, or highly educated if still school students. I have tried breaking myself of this habit, but I struggle to write people like that because the people I grew up with are all university graduates; my ex-wife is one, my kids are either at or aiming for university. My second is that my female characters have long hair. I find longer hair very attractive, and it is something I am struggling to overcome. I have deliberately written some MC females with shorter hair, but still fall back on my long-haired preference. The one I have managed to pull away from (I think) is having every single character go to the gym. I do still use it at times, but only where it becomes important for the story now. Otherwise, every long story had a gym junkie somewhere. Now, here’s two things that I have been accused of in characterization that I don’t think are issues. First is smoking. I rarely have my characters be smokers. I have only smoked marijuana, so the idea of an addiction like that is something I simply struggle to write realistically. Second is a lack of people of African descent in my stories. I use Indigenous Australians and people from Asia, but none from Africa. I don’t think USians realize that, until this century, we rarely saw people from Africa here. We never had an African slave trade, and Australia was not seen as a place for them to emigrate to, so – with the exception of US athletes who came here to play basketball – I never saw people with African heritage except on TV. It is not racist – it is just that people from that continent tended not to be here. Ditto for people of Jewish faith. I have never met a Jew IRL. Like, ever. 3) Story Beats This is a tough call because, especially for those of us versed in Campbell’s Hero’s Journey arc, every story follows the same beats. However, there tends to be something that happens in my stories that I need to get rid of, and something I have managed to stop doing. My main thing, and one I am really pushing to work on, is that not all the good guys survive. There is good guy, often MC, death and it does tend to bring the tone down. So, for example, in the first draft of Invasive Species, the female who kills the monster died in the attempt. Before it reached the beta reader, I had her survive, and also gave her short hair. Yes, this was a deliberate subvert the expectations of myself. But in Patch Of Green, Sins Of The Fathers, and Relick (3 of my 5 published novels), a good guy dies. Sometimes more than one. The only reason it doesn’t happen in Under Ground is that that is YA, and the deaths would not have suited the story. The one I have managed to stop doing is having the love interest have a break-up (except where it is needed to get them apart). In a romance, it is different, but there is no need for the couple to break up in the middle of a horror story. Sure, they can argue, but mine always had a break-up, resulting in them having to get back together. And those are my personal writing foibles. I could not just list common ones because these are personal to each and every writer. And, yes, every writer has them. Maybe not something in all three categories, but there is something there. One other I have seen mentioned is “setting” but I think this is not a foible. Stephen King is a great example here – his fictional Derry, Maine setting. On a lesser level, my own work tends to be set in South Australia. Why is this not a foible? Because it sets up a writer’s personal universe. You can reference other works in more recent ones, and ties the books together. And, more importantly (and this is my case) – the writer clearly knows the area. I have lived my entire life in South Australia; I know the place and people, and so in a work of fiction it comes across as more realistic. Setting is not a foible, but a choice. I must also point out that foibles are not mistakes. They are things that occur in writing that can almost be said, as I mentioned, to be style. However, they can be reduced to cliché in a writer’s work, or can even become a source of mocking or not taking a writer seriously, which is why I bring them up. So, those are my own personal foibles. Can you recognize any in your own writing? |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
