You’ve Got Personality

Elrond INTJ

Hey!  I resemble that remark.

It’s that time of year again! Our town is having Trick or Treating today, and it’s cold and rainy. So rather than sitting out in the garage with a bucket of candy, like we used to, we’re going to do the same thing we did last year and just leave a bag of candy on a lawn chair at the end of our drive with a sign saying, “Please Take One.” That’s probably good enough, don’t you think?

But I’m not just talking about Halloween. National Novel Writing Month starts on Wednesday, and S and I are ready to start writing. As we’ve mentioned before, we’re working together on a joint project this year. But I’ve also thought about maybe doing a side project as well. Hypothetically speaking, it might possibly be a novel for S’s Christmas present. (Don’t tell her!)

Anyway, I was sitting around a few days ago, thinking about characters for this new novel I might possibly be writing, and I was trying to think of personality traits for them. S mentioned before that we’ve started doing Myers-Briggs tests for our characters, and we’ve found that really helpful. We don’t necessarily take the tests as gospel—we still reserve the right to say, “Oh, I don’t think that quite sounds like her”—but it gives us a list of personality traits that often seem to clump together in real people.

For example, one of the POV characters in Magnificent Kingdom, the story S and I are working on together, is an ENTP. On various sites online, the traits of an ENTP are listed as: “Quick, ingenious, stimulating, alert, and outgoing. Resourceful, creative, and enjoys debating issues and values. Good at solving new problems. Able to analyze concepts and turn them into strategies. Astute with regards to others, disinterested in conventional ways of doing things.” (I assume the site meant “uninterested,” but whatever.) “Bored by routine.”

Having a list like this is always helpful, because if you sit down and try to think of personality traits for a character, it’s hard to see a larger pattern: “She’s clever,” you might say, or “she’s resourceful.” Okay, sure. But what else is she? Doing these tests helps you come up with a fuller, more rounded personality for the character.

The trouble, as I discovered when I was doing these tests for my main character a couple days ago, is that a lot of these online sites are a little too nice about the characteristics that they list. They’re clearly intended for people to use in typing themselves, and the sites are obviously trying to phrase everything in the most complimentary way possible. When you read the traits of all the different types, they all sound like marvelous people, and suddenly it occurred to me, “What about the negative traits?” So I did a quick Google search and found a site that specifically listed both the strengths and the weaknesses of each personality type. For ENTP, they are: “Poor follow-up skills,” “argumentative,” and “easily bored.” The last two are basically repeats from the list of positive traits (“Bored by routine,” and “enjoys debating issues and values.”), but once you see them phrased as negatives, you start to think, “Oh, I bet she thinks of herself as ‘enjoying debates,’ but other people might see her as being ‘argumentative.’”

“Poor follow-up skills” is entirely new, though if you think about it, it’s kind-of implied by “Good at solving new problems.” (Only new problems? As opposed to finishing her work on old ones, you mean?) When I read that to S last night, we both agreed that this fit the character, and that it was a new and interesting facet to her personality that we hadn’t considered before. She’s a good person, and she tries to look after another one of the POV characters. But she doesn’t follow up with him very well, which has disastrous consequences for everyone. She’s constantly being distracted by exciting new things, and she forgets to keep her eye on the ball, as it were. She never finishes an old task; she’s always running off to start new ones.

And speaking of finishing tasks, I need to wrap this up so S and I can go shopping. We’re thinking of buying a new coffee pot today. The old one is in pretty bad shape, and I had to drink tea for breakfast today. Not that there’s anything wrong with tea, but it’s not the same as coffee. And NaNo is the wrong time of year to be without coffee!

See you again next week, though it’s only fair to warn you that our updates will probably be a bit shorter in November, since we have novels to write!

J

Advertisements

A Second Opinion

tumblr_n39lbxWWRN1tnl7e1o4_1280

A slide from a presentation created by http://wordsandchocolate.tumblr.com/.

Life continues to be hectic at Unicorn HQ with house selling and hunting and legal paperwork you just don’t even want to know about. But even with all the madness, J and I are doing our best to get ready for NaNoWrMo, which somehow is only a week and a half away. Luckily the outline is done, but in our world the prep only starts there. We also have several maps and floor plans of important locations, and earlier this week we finished dividing who will be writing which chapters. (At 83 chapters, it was never going to come out even. J, for the record, is writing the extra chapter.)

We, of course, also have detailed character sheets. Depending on how vital a character is to the story, the profile could be as simple as a Myers-Brigg type with a quick bit about physical appearance and where the character is from. But for our six POV characters, we spend a bit more time. We’ve discussed the form we created for characters before, but since we’re always tweaking it, here’s the latest version.

Age:
Born (year and place):
Family:
Likes/Dislikes:
Physical Appearance:
Talent(s):
Other Characteristics:
Other Facts:
Voice:
What does he want:
Why he wants it:
Willing to do to get it:
Fatal flaw:

For a minor character, we may only list one or two Likes/Dislikes and a single vital Other Fact, whereas for a POV character we’ll have a dozen Likes/Dislikes and list their entire education, important travels, and other events of their life. Also for the POV characters, we do the character beat up found in My Story Can Beat Up Your Story.

Thematic question:
Antagonist’s answer:
Hero’s 4 Questions
Who is the hero?
What is he trying to accomplish?
Who is stopping him?
What happens if he fails?
Antagonist’s 4 Questions
(Same questions as Hero)
Central questions:
Physical Goal:
Emotional Goal:
Spiritual Goal:
Relationship Character:
Antagonist:
Protector:
Deflector:
Believer:
Doubter:
Thinker:
Feeler:

Because life is so crazy at the moment and we don’t know if we’ll have time to reread the entire outline together before NaNo, we thought we should at least read through the character sheets for our six POV characters. But we also added one more list to think about that I recently ran across on Tumblr. It covers the 5 P’s of creating characters.

Physical
Psychological
Personal
Personality
Practices

Each of these headings has several aspects to think about when creating a character. J and I like this checklist a lot, and it was a fresh way to look at our characters one last time before we start writing them. Of course, once we start writing them, the thinking will just move to the next phase, but at least we feel ready for that to happen.

~S

Not Quite Sticking the Landing

Halt and Catch Fire Fall Quote

Well, not fall, exactly, but maybe a little stumble, right there at the end.

It’s been a busy weekend here at Unicorn HQ. The big excitement this weekend was the series finale of Halt and Catch Fire, though that didn’t turn out quite as we had hoped. More on that in a minute. First, the other news. As I’ve mentioned, I’m teaching a new class this semester, and I have to drive almost two hours to do it. That eats up a lot of my Friday afternoons and Saturday mornings. At least S had a chance to do some laundry while I was out, so at least one of us did something productive.

Today we’ve been cleaning around the house. Doing it all at once would just be too depressing, so we’re doing one room a day. Or at least that’s our goal. We haven’t quite been meeting that goal, but it’s still a lovely goal to have, all the same, don’t you think? I certainly do.

Pretty soon we’re going to have start thinking seriously about our NaNoWriMo project again. We developed the outline and the character profiles back during July Camp NaNo, but we haven’t looked at them in a couple months, so we’ll need to review them and talk a bit more about who is going to be responsible for writing which parts. But that can happen another time. Right now we’re resting after cleaning our living room and slowly working our way through a pair of well-deserved Bloody Marys.

When we haven’t been cleaning this morning, we’ve been dissecting the Halt and Catch Fire finale. As I put it to S last night before bed, it was a three star finish to a five star series. It wasn’t horrible, but it certainly could have been better. Last week, S said, “assuming they stick the landing, it will rank as one of our favorite shows of all time.” Well, they didn’t quite crash, but the landing was a bit bumpier than you would hope for.

The scenes between Donna and Cameron were all fine. But there were probably too many of them. And the resolution of their relationship came at the expense of Joe, who basically disappeared for the length of a Bible during the last episode. The Donna/Cameron storyline feels as if it came to a satisfying conclusion. But Joe just wandered off, and when we saw him, he was hanging out with random people we didn’t know and had never met before. Where was his resolution with Donna? With Cameron? With Haley (who could be seen as a surrogate for Gordon)? What we got was a letter written to Haley and read by her to Cameron, which would have been fine if there was going to be another episode after this. And we got a scene of him teaching a class, which would have been a fine place to leave him if there was going to be another season in which he could reconnect to the other two main characters. But this was the end, and it just felt very strange and unsatisfying to leave him there. As S and I decided last night, the show really needed to show him getting a phone call from Cameron, asking for some unspecified help on Donna’s exciting new idea. Just something to assure the viewer that he and Donna and Cameron will continue to have a relationship moving forward, because the heart of the show has always been the relationships between the main characters. It’s a little disappointing that the writers seem to have forgotten that, and right after we’d complemented them on doing it so well last week, too.

So it wasn’t as good as it could have been. But it wasn’t terrible. It certainly wasn’t the last episode of Justified, but at the same time, it wasn’t the last episode of How I Met Your Mother, either. It’s not like it took our love for the show and stomped on it. The bottom line, I suppose, is that we’ll probably still buy the whole series on DVD or Blu-ray. We just might not watch that last episode very often.

J

When Four Is Greater than Fourteen (or Nine)

HaltandCatchFire

The amazing main cast of AMC’s Halt and Catch Fire

So, last night J and I were watching TV. First we watched Halt and Catch Fire on AMC and then flipped over to Ovation for Versailles. Afterwards, we talked. A lot. (I am so tired today. You would not believe.) Versailles is a show I’m particularly attached to, even though I find it incredible frustrating at times, and we discussed what works, what doesn’t, and how we would change the show. (For instance, put Louis and Philippe in a room, and I’m in heaven. Other characters, well, not so much with a lot of them.) On the other hand, we can’t stop talking about how perfect Halt and Catch Fire is. Next Saturday is the two-hour series finale, and assuming they stick the landing, it will rank as one of our favorite shows of all time. So, what makes HaCF different from Versailles?

Joe and Cameron and Gordon and Donna

HaCF never forgets that it’s a show about four people. Yes, there are great insights about the birth of the tech industry, but the first season never scans as an 80s nostalgia show any more than this season reads as the story of the birth of web browsers in the early 90s. Yes, these characters are products of their time, but the show is never about their time; it’s about the four leads. Bos is there (and Toby Huss is listed in the opening credits) to hold Joe, Cameron, Gordon, and Donna together, especially when the story keeps the four characters apart, but the show is always firmly about the main four. Every season sees some new characters added to the cast: Tom in Season 2, Ryan and Diane in Season 3, Katie in Season 4 (as well as the expansion of the roles for Joanie and Haley), but they are only part of the show to enhance the viewer’s knowledge of the main cast. These additional characters never threaten to take over or become some hideous Cousin Oliver.

A good example of the show’s focus on these four characters is the latest episode. One of these lead characters dies at the end of the previous episode, and this entire ep is what happens the day they all go to the deceased character’s home to begin packing. Some shows might take a scene or two for the grief and mundane tasks of those left behind, most likely after a very nicely staged funeral. But HaCF skips the funeral. We are told the service was lovely, and then move on to an entire episode of actually dealing with the death. It’s what this show is about, and why I love it.

MICE

In the terminology outlined by Orson Scott Card in Characters and Viewpoint, HaCF is a Character story. It never tries to be anything other than a Character story, and it does everything it can to be the best Character story possible. Where I think a lot of TV shows (and novels and movies for that matter) go astray is when they don’t understand what kind of story they are telling. I blame Game of Thrones. (And Lord of the Rings, as well.) Sprawling stories with a cast of thousands are the big thing these days. And the ones that work, like GoT and LOTR, work because they are Milieu stories. The cast of GoT is huge, and the individual characters are often amazing and complex, but it’s not a Character story. GoT is the story of Westros. It is a story about place, just as LOTR is the story of Middle-earth. If either of those stories tried to be Character stories, they would be so fundamentally different as to be unrecognizable. Just as HaCF wouldn’t mean nearly as much if it were a Milieu story of the 1980s Austin tech scene.

Louis and…

In terms of MICE, I’m not sure what kind of story Versailles thinks it is. The argument for it being a Milieu story is kind of right there in the title, and the cast is large and ever expanding. (The opening credits of Season 1 lists nine actors, which I think under reports the important characters in the season. For Season 2 it’s been upped to fourteen.) And we certainly spend the majority of our time at the eponymous palace, but if it were truly the story of Versailles, then Season 1 would have been about Louis XIII’s hunting lodge in the woods, and Season 2 about Louis XIV’s expansion, Season 3 Louis XV and the escapades of Madame de Pompadour, and we would eventually wrap up with the French Revolution.

But what if “Versailles” is just code for “Louis”? What if it’s a Character story? In that case, the cast needs to be halved. (In a HaCF shaped show of four main characters and a fifth who ties them together, it would have had a hard focus on Louis, Philippe, Marie-Thérèse, and Liselotte with Bontemps nearby.) If not Character, what if it were an Idea story, which is the structure of most mystery stories? The strongest plot element of Season 1 is certainly the conspiracy against Louis, but in Season 2, the mysteries are the weakest parts. The show could also have been an Event story about the Franco-Dutch Wars. This would certainly require expanding the role of William of Orange, a solid choice considering the best episode of Season 2 consists primarily of Louis and William in a room talking, following one of the most famous battles of that war.

But I don’t know that Versailles picked any of these. The history of this era is ripe for the telling of numerous amazing stories, and yet this show doesn’t seem to have settled on which to tell or how to tell it. This leads to some great characters (truly, I will watch Louis and Philippe in the same room doing or discussing anything) and beautiful moments (the previously mentioned Louis and William scenes, for instance), but it doesn’t lead to as satisfying a whole as I wish.

And so…

I’m not saying Versailles needs to be a Character story to be as good as HaCF, but I am saying it needed to pick the structure right for the story they wanted to tell. And as a writer, this discussion has made me more aware than ever that I must know what my story is about and how best to tell it. This is particularly important as J and I head into NaNoWriMo. We’re tackling the largest story we’ve ever told in a single volume, likely running to over 200,000 words with a huge cast, dozens of locations, and spread over several years and many significant events. Even though I wanted to tell this story because of my fascination with the two leads, I need to remember that I’m really telling an Event story, and while I want to make those two characters (and the rest of the cast) as strong and interesting as possible, I can never lose sight of the Event. This isn’t the novel for endless navel gazing, which isn’t a bad thing if you’re writing a Character story, but that isn’t what I’m writing. And if I start writing that, I’m glad I have J to get me back on track.

~S

Hard-Earned Lessons

snape study hall

Do your work. You’ll be happy later that you did.

J and I were chatting yesterday as we made the two-hour drive home from his parents’ about what we wish we had known when we started writing nearly 10 years ago. It was such a good list I thought I should share. It’s by no means definitive, and I’ve no doubt other writers would come up with other items, but if it helps anyone avoid the mistakes we made, then it was worth my time.

Structure
There is pretty much nothing easier than writing a giant blob of prose. Writing tens of thousands of words that are novel-shaped is decidedly harder. It’s more than just beginning, middle, and end. It’s advancing character and story, plotting setbacks, making sure the reader isn’t about to nod off or complaining that what you’re telling them is pointless. If I could go back 10 years and tell myself only one thing, it would be to study structure before putting pen to paper.

Chapters
Speaking of structure, how do you know when to end a chapter? How long should it be? What, exactly, ought to go in one? There’s no one answer for every novel, and we’ve intentionally played around with this in different novels, but we had some 7,000 word chapters with 3 POVs, and zero thematic elements tying them together when we started. We write in decidedly more logical chunks these days.

You won’t remember later
Write. It. Down. That brilliant idea that is so awesome you couldn’t possibly forget it? You will. That solution you found and put in Chapter 10 is great, but when you need it again in Chapter 50, you won’t remember if you didn’t put it in the story bible. Really, if we could go back and keep a more organized story bible from Day 1, it would help a ton. And it really would have helped a lot, even if we’d never moved past the original Quartet. Now that we have over two dozen novels in the Myrcia ‘verse, a good story bible is absolutely essential. And for those little ideas that pop up, they all get written down for use later.

Write in order
We thought it would be all awesome and creative to write the scenes that most inspired us as they inspired us. So when we started, we were literally writing scenes from what would become Book 2 before the characters in that scene had even met in Book 1. At the time, it seemed like a good way to get words down, and I suppose it was, but what it mostly did was make revision twice as long as we then rewrote all of those later scenes to take into account earlier material. Sometimes, I still move around a little, but I a) have a much better outline, and therefore, a better of idea of the story as a whole, and b) have made peace with the fact it will entail extra revision.

Sympathetic characters
We thought if we created a character we liked—a smart girl who is ambitious and happy, surrounded by people who also think she’s awesome—the reader would like her, too. Oops. Early betas found her insufferable and much preferred the girl with the crappy family and the worse husband, who was always looking for a way to make her shitty lot in life just a little better. I think we’ve made them both pretty interesting and sympathetic now, but yeah, we really didn’t understand at first that adversity gets a reader on the side of your character far more than showing how popular she is.

Calendar
When you have four POV characters spread over thousands of miles in an era when travel was remarkably difficult, keeping an accurate calendar is a must. We had some general ideas about when things should be happening, but when we plotted out exact dates when things had to happen and figured out how long it would take someone to get from Point A to Point B, we realized the timing was completely off. But, thank heavens for those poor traveling conditions so that freak snow storms could hold people up for a week, and magic allows a message to get to someone almost as fast as by telegram. As I’m about to start an epistolary novel, I’m already dreading my calendar—trying to figure out when someone wrote a letter and more importantly when someone read it, again in a world with much slower travel than today. But I know I will be happy that I did, and just like all of these other lessons, when I think about skipping over them, I do my best to make that my mantra—I will be happy that I did.

~S

Learning All the Wrong Lessons

hot_for_teacher

My homework was never quite like this.

Not that we’re bloodthirsty or anything, but we sure like ourselves a good character death.  We’ve talked here before about when it’s appropriate, and sometimes even necessary, to kill characters.

Just in case you don’t feel like clicking on those links, our three rules for offing a character are as follows:

1) Would it be intellectually dishonest not to kill the character?

2) Is it dramatically the right choice?

3) Does the character dying have interesting repercussions for those left alive?

One of the examples we used to show the proper killing of a character was Ned Stark from Game of Thrones.  As S wrote:

It would be incredibly dishonest and make the mighty Lannisters look incredibly weak if Ned Stark fails to die. And the drama in that moment is heart wrenching. Plus, so much of what matters in the moment of his death is how it will change the lives of his children, most importantly Robb. Everything about Ned Stark’s death accomplishes precisely what a writer (and reader/viewer) hopes it will.

So Ned’s death was a great moment in the story, and a great moment in TV.  Unfortunately, as we were watching The 100 this past week, it occurred to us that other shows are learning exactly the wrong lesson from Game of Thrones.  Rather than learning that killing a character can drive the story and provide motivation for the characters, it appears as if the writers of The 100 learned that it’s really cool to just bump off characters randomly for shock value.

In what’s been called the show’s ongoing Hunger Games storyline, characters like Jasper and Roan keep getting killed, not because there’s any logic or justification for it, but seemingly just because the writers want us to think “ZOMG!  They totally killed that guy!”  And then applaud them for their bold storytelling.  The worst part is the violation of the third of our rules: there are zero repercussions for anyone left alive, and in fact the other characters barely remember those who died at all.  But then again, that’s always been a problem for that show.  See, for example, poor old…oh, what’s his name?  It’s on the tip of my tongue.

Oh yes, Finn.

thomas_mcdonell

Remember when he was the love of Clarke’s life?  No?  Well, that’s okay.  Neither does Clarke. 

So that’s what’s been on our mind this week.  In other news, S just finished posting her latest fanfic series, and the feedback from readers has been very good.  So huzzah for her!  And I’m about ten chapters into my latest Myrciaverse book, which might hypothetically be a birthday present for someone who might hypothetically be S.

Yes, we write stories for each other for our birthdays.  It’s the unicorniest thing ever.  So I’ve got to get back to that.  In the meantime, let’s all hope The 100 figures out how to make character deaths count.  I mean, I’m not holding my breath, but it could happen.

J

Teasing the Inevitable

victoria-and-albert

Gosh, I hope it works out for these two crazy kids.

Tonight is the Oscars.  S and I are going to an Oscar party, though that’s mainly just for the fun of going to a party.  As far as the nominees are concerned, as my dad always likes to say, you can’t begin to plumb the depths of my indifference.  I was just looking at the official site, and in pretty much every category, it’s just movie after movie that I’ve never seen.  We got A Man Called Ove from the library.  And we watched about the first half-hour or so of Captain Fantastic.  And I saw Zootopia on Netflix.  But other than that, I’ve seen nothing.

The truth is that S and I spend a lot more time reading and watching TV anymore than we do watching movies.  Especially movies in the theater.  It’s been a very long time since we’ve gone out for a movie, in fact.  But that’s okay, because there’s so much good TV and so many good books.

Speaking of which, we just got the DVDs of Victoria with Jenna Coleman from the library, and we stayed up a bit later than we should have last night watching the first five episodes.  That took us from Victoria’s accession to her marriage to Albert.  It’s very good, and I wouldn’t be surprised if we finish it today.

At the same time, we’re reading Ethan Frome for S’s classic lit book club.  I’ve read it before, years ago, but S hasn’t.  Thanks to a technical glitch in the Google Books version that she’s been reading, she ended up accidentally skipping the introduction.  (For those of you who have read the book, that’s the frame story, where the narrator meets Ethan Frome and ends up having to stay at his house in a snowstorm.)  So we dug out her tablet and I read it to her while she drove.  And of course it changes the story quite a bit when you start out knowing, even from Ethan’s first appearance in the book, that something awful is going to happen to him.  The question becomes, “How did this happen?”

That’s the same issue faced with historical fiction, like Victoria.  No one with even the slightest knowledge of history has any doubt how things are going to work out between Victoria and Albert.  The facts are well known, and there’s not really any way to create suspense there.

The trick, in both cases, seems to be a focus on the characters.  Both Edith Wharton and the writers of Victoria seem to be concentrating not on trying to create false suspense where suspense is impossible, but rather giving us marvelous and telling little bits of character development.  In other words, rather than focusing on the outcome (What will happen to Ethan Frome?  Who will Victoria marry?), we focus on the internal qualities of the characters—the flaws and strengths that will lead them to this outcome that we already know.

Here, for example, is the third paragraph of the main narrative of Ethan Frome:

The night was perfectly still, and the air so dry and pure that it gave little sensation of cold. The effect produced on Frome was rather of a complete absence of atmosphere, as though nothing less tenuous than ether intervened between the white earth under his feet and the metallic dome overhead. “It’s like being in an exhausted receiver,” he thought. Four or five years earlier he had taken a year’s course at a technological college at Worcester, and dabbled in the laboratory with a friendly professor of physics; and the images supplied by that experience still cropped up, at unexpected moments, through the totally different associations of thought in which he had since been living. His father’s death, and the misfortunes following it, had put a premature end to Ethan’s studies; but though they had not gone far enough to be of much practical use they had fed his fancy and made him aware of huge cloudy meanings behind the daily face of things.

Even before we know why this much younger, healthier Ethan has walked into Starkfield, we know something vitally important about him—he’s a frustrated scholar unhappy with his lot in life.  Similarly, there’s a fantastic scene in episode 5 of Victoria, where Albert’s libertine older brother, Ernest, takes him to a brothel to “educate” him before his marriage.  Albert goes off with one of the prostitutes, but rather than sleep with her, he just talks to her and takes notes on what he should do on his wedding night.  It really explains a lot about the character, and about the kind of relationship we (as viewers who know our history) know we’ll be seeing later on between the queen and her beloved prince consort.

As a writer, I suppose the lesson here is to remember that “how” and “why” are sometimes more important than “what” happened.  If you create interest in your characters, you can make the reader want to keep reading, even when there’s no suspense as to how things are going to end up.

J

The Long and the Short of It

sante

my silly edit from Versailles

Last weekend I finished the longest solo work of my writing life. (J and I discussed that I’ve easily written 200K+ words of the Quartet on my own, but that’s not really a solo project.) It’s a Musketeers fanfic of limited appeal I started it back in July. It will never be widely read, and it took a boatload of time and effort to write, but I’m really glad I did it. I think it’s quite good, which is something I almost never say about my own writing. I’m, frankly, crazy proud of it. I’m still in the process of posting it for the rest of the world to see, so it’s not out of my life yet, but the blood and tears have been shed, and it’s time to think about what’s next.

Returning to the pattern I had going about this time last year, I think I’m going to juggle multiple projects, at least until one insists upon itself and demands my full attention. Some of it’s going to be original fiction, some is going to be fanfic, and some of it will be Myrcia ‘verse. It’s going to be a mix of short and long pieces, with a healthy dose of outlining thrown in.

The Swift True Road/Mercenary stories

This is my Italian Renaissance mercenary novel I started back for NaNoWriMo.  I never felt truly comfortable with the setting, and my outline is a giant mess, and I was trying to squeeze way too much into one novel. Dropping it was one of the best choices I ever made. But I do want to get back to it, and this time I want to do it right. I asked J for advice, and he came up with something I wasn’t expecting.

Write short stories.

“Huh?” I thought as I tried to figure out how that was going to fix my novel, but then he explained. Since part of my problem was not feeling comfortable in the world, J suggested I write some short stories, almost like character prompts. I should focus on one character and a part of the setting I need to understand better, and just write that. Once I’ve written, for instance, Francesco’s first night in camp as a mercenary, I’ll know more about that character and how mercenary camps work. (It also helps focus my research, so I’m not “GAH! Must know entire Renaissance world!”) I want to write at least one story for each of my named characters, so I’m thinking that perhaps after a dozen or so of these, I’ll be ready to dive back into restructuring the novel. And I’ll have a nice little collection of short stories I might look into posting somewhere.

Two Shots of Bourbon/Versailles fanfic

I think I’m about to dive into a new fandom with my fanfic—Versailles. I mentioned the show briefly  after we finished watching Season 1 the first time, and since then my obsession with the show has just grown. I’m particularly interested in the brothers at the center of the show, Louis XIV and Philippe I, Duke of Orleans. But as I’ve started outlining my first fanfic and toying with ideas, I’m finding myself a little hesitant for a lot of reasons. My biggest concern is getting Louis’s voice right. Chatting with the lovely Storyskein this morning, I mentioned that maybe I should do a one-shot from Louis’s POV before diving into the longer fic I have planned. In other words…

Write short stories.

I already have a one-shot piece in mind to write from Louis’s POV, after which switching to Philippe’s POV for a story would probably not go amiss. (Just because I’m not as nervous about getting his voice correct right now doesn’t mean I won’t be later if I skip practicing it now.) Also, a couple of short pieces would be a nice way to introduce myself to a new fandom. Plus, having just finished my longest work, I could probably use the mental change of something shorter.

Oleg Omdahl 4

When I’ll get around to actually writing this, who knows. I certainly won’t be ready for April Camp NaNoWriMo, but perhaps July Camp or NaNo proper in November. In any case, it’s never too early to start extreme outlining. I actually outlined Oleg 3 (Fiat Justitia) a year and a half before I wrote it, so there’s no reason I can’t get to work on this at any time J might be up to diving into it with me. (I will admit I really adore outlining with J. It’s one of my great joys in life.) I already know a lot of what I want to do in this one, it will just be a matter of filling in blanks.

And that’s what’s on my plate. And it looks really quite tasty. I’ll be sure to report back on how the short story theory works out.

~S

The Persuasion Project: Chapter 6

persuasion-ch-6

CE Brock illustration from mollands.net

 

It’s Persuasion Live Read time again! Chapter 6 opens with a nice bit of character building for Anne, but without a ton of plot happening during her stay with her sister, Mary Musgrove, at Uppercross Coattage. And even though things pick up a bit later on, I think I’m just going to pull some quotes that struck me. It’s as “live” as I can make my read. (Crazy thought—Read aloud with asides. Post audio.) Anyhow, here’s my favorite example of what Austen is doing in this chapter with Anne.

She played a great deal better than either of the Miss Musgroves, but having no voice, no knowledge of the harp, and no fond parents, to sit by and fancy themselves delighted, her performance was little thought of, only out of civility, or to refresh the others, as she was well aware. She knew that when she played she was giving pleasure only to herself; but this was no new sensation.

Just in case you were questioning whether or not Anne Eliot is a better person than you. Truly, she is always willing to be underappreciated, put everyone’s complaints and desires above her own. Is there any heroine who is so content to be unassuming without also coming across as spineless and unsympathetic? (I’m looking at you, Fanny Price. I’m looking at you.)

But then in the second half of the chapter, the Crofts arrive to take up residence at Kellynch. I immediately love Mrs. Croft when she comes to visit Anne and Mary at Uppercross Cottage.

Her manners were open, easy, and decided, like one who had no distrust of herself, and no doubts of what to do; without any approach to coarseness, however, or any want of good humour.

She’s entirely my kind of woman, and frankly, after all of the shallow, fake, and conniving people in Anne’s life, exactly the friend our heroine deserves. However, Mrs. Croft then nearly gives Anne a heart attack.

“It was you, and not your sister, I find, that my brother had the pleasure of being acquainted with, when he was in this country.”

Anne hoped she had outlived the age of blushing; but the age of emotion she certainly had not.

“Perhaps you may not have heard that he is married?” added Mrs Croft.

Of course, this turns out to be Captain Wentworth’s brother who used to live in their neighborhood, and the man the Captain was visiting when he and Anne fell in love. It could be a cheap ploy, but it works, and my heart is in my mouth along with Anne’s.

Another thing I love about Austen especially in this novel—her practical, honest narrative voice. Here’s how she describes the loss of the youngest of the Musgrove sons, Richard.

The real circumstances of this pathetic piece of family history were, that the Musgroves had had the ill fortune of a very troublesome, hopeless son; and the good fortune to lose him before he reached his twentieth year; that he had been sent to sea because he was stupid and unmanageable on shore; that he had been very little cared for at any time by his family, though quite as much as he deserved; seldom heard of, and scarcely at all regretted, when the intelligence of his death abroad had worked its way to Uppercross, two years before.

So blunt and honest in a way you don’t expect the well-mannered to be, and no one (seemingly) has better manners than Jane Austen. J and I were just discussing why Pride and Prejudice has received far and away the best adaptation (the BBC mini), and he proposed it’s because Austen’s narrative voice is so significant to the enjoyment of her novels, and that the narrative voice in P&P is so close to Elizabeth Bennet’s voice you can have her believably deliver the famous opening line about a man of large fortune and other tidbits from the narration. It feels so natural and the best of Austen remains. What more can you want? The narrative voice of Persuasion is so wonderfully blunt and subtle all at once, without the restrictions Anne feels since she is such a decent, unassuming woman. (Crazy idea—work out this theory some more and write about it in detail.)

And that’s all for now, but I’m so excited because Captain Wentworth is coming!!!!!

~S

 

The Long Count

sesame-street-count

1,243, count them, 1,243 pages!  Mwahaha!

It’s Sunday again, and we almost forgot to blog. S has been working on a rather important project for work that we won’t discuss here. I’ve been working a little on some reference works for the Myrciaverse. Also, we made a pot roast for supper, and it was delicious.

Over the weekend we finished The Count of Monte Cristo for S’s book club. It’s the second time I’ve read it, and it’s easy to forget just how incredibly long it is. How long is it? Well, it’s so long that the book club is doing War and Peace this summer, and thanks to The Count of Monte Cristo, War and Peace will only be the second-longest book we’re reading this year. That’s how long it is. S may post her thoughts on it sometime, but here’s my super-quick review.

It’s very good, and if you’ve got a few months free, I would highly recommend it. However, we had a few issues with it. For one thing, Dumas really drags the story out. There are long books that feel shorter than they are, like War and Peace. And for the most part, The Count of Monte Cristo is one of those. It reads pretty quickly. But there are times, like the chapters where Luigi Vampa, the Roman bandit, is introduced, that take up far, far more space than they really need to.

Then there are problems with the story itself. The count’s relationship with Haydée, his Greek slave girl, seems awfully forced. The count ends up with her because reasons, basically. One gets the sense that Dumas planned it that way, and forgot to show their relationship developing believably over the course of the story. As I remarked to S right after we reached the end, Haydée is the Ginny Weasley of the book.

As for the count himself, the fact that he decides that revenge is bad at the end comes out of pretty much nowhere. And the way he treats Maximilien Morrel at the end—refusing to come right out and say that Maximilien’s sweetheart, Valentine de Villefort, is still alive—is just cruel. When Maximilien and Valentine are reunited, they both act absurdly grateful to the count, when any normal person in their place would smack the guy in the face.

But even so, it was a good book. Good enough to read twice, in fact.

J