Yet another post about NaNoWriMo

Unless you've been living in a state of blissful forgetfulness, I'm sure you're all aware that it's almost time for NaNoWriMo. You can find out more about it here. 50K in 30 days. It sound scary but it really isn't. It's a good way to kickstart that novel you've been kicking around in your head. Or you can be a NaNo Rebel and finish an already started manuscript. You can't use anything you've previously written in your word count of course, but it's still possible. (Yes I know I did a post on NaNo on the 3^rd. Bear with me for the repeat.)

Now, I've been doing this since 2003. I haven't won every year. I've lost five times due to various circumstances. A couple of them, life jumped up and bit me on the ass. The others I didn't like what I was working on and lost interest in it. I tried to write a different story, counting the words on the original idea I had as part of my word count (which I could get away with since I wrote it in November). It didn't help. I floundered and just couldn't get into it.

I've read some fantastic posts regarding NaNo over the month. Liana Brooks has been doing NaNo boot camps on her blog every Tuesday and Thursday. One of my favorite blogs, done by Kristen Lamb, has a few good posts on it as well for NaNo. And just for general information about writing. Both of these ladies are awesome.

What am I doing to prepare for NaNo? Good question. I'm working out character backgrounds, setting descriptions, and who the antagonist is since I still don't know who my main characters are fighting against. I had an idea, but I didn't like it so now I'm scrambling to figure something else out. But all of this is as much of a plan I'm doing. I'm a pantser, not a plotter.

What about you? Are you doing NaNoWriMo? What's your story going to be about? Are you planning or pantsing?

Am I a REAL writer?

Do you write? If the answer to that question is yes, then congratulations, you're a real writer.

But I don't write for hours every day. I still have a day job. I only get an hour or two to write every day. Am I still a writer?

See previous answer.

I know a lot of writers, un-published authors for the most part but I've even heard this come from a few published ones too, who continue to believe they aren't real writers because they still have day jobs to pay their bills, don't write for hours on end, and have been working on the same story for the past year, writing and revising.

I'm no expert on this, but I do know I've felt like this many times. I still feel like it from time to time. I have to remind myself of the answer to that first question. Do I write? Then yes, I'm a writer.

Kristen Lamb has a brilliant post today dealing with just this topic. She also brings up the fact that writing is like a small business. I found that an interesting comparison, and one that I think requires some thought.

Being published is how many of us gauge if we're writers or not. In this new world of publishing opportunities there are many ways to get that result. But the question comes up again. Are we REAL authors if we self publish? If we go through a small press without agent representation? Are we really REAL authors if we have an agent and a big publisher buys our work?

For the longest time, the answer to that last question was yes. Now, is it as vital to get a big publisher? I don't know on that one, though I do know you're less likely to see indie, small press, and self pubbed books on the NYTBS list. I won't say it's impossible, because really anything can happen. But the NYT tends to favor traditionally published books.

The question really shouldn't be are we real writers/authors. The question should be “do we enjoy what we're doing and are we telling the story we want to tell?” If the answer to that is yes, then I believe that's what matters. As writers, we write to tell stories. Sometimes we sell them. Sometimes we don't. But those stories that we don't sell still have value. They're still stories we kept hidden in our brains until they finally emerged onto paper (or word processor).

So, are you writing stories? Do you enjoy the act of writing stories? Are you willing to put the work into those stories that you need to?

Then yes, you are a writer.

Description - what's too much, too little, just enough

For all of my writer readers, you may have realized I have a love affair with Kristen Lamb's blog. Seriously, you need to follow her blog and on Facebook. I don't remember if she has a Twitter account or not, but if she does you need to follow her there too. She's an amazing woman. Her Facebook feed is full of her more personal life. It lets you get to know the woman. Her blog is full of writing advice and lets you get to know the author/editor.

Today's post is about description. This is something I have trouble with. Am I giving too much? Am I giving too little? What's my middle ground? Kristen has some great advice for us and I thought I'd share the highlights.

She talks about avoiding description like you'd give to a police sketch artist. As she puts it, “...a good writer is a wordsmith and we should be able to describe characters better than someone who's been on the wrong end of a purse snatching.” Anyone can do this kind of description. It gives you an idea of what someone or something looks like, but it doesn't tell you anything about the person/place. There's no emotional attachment.

The info dump description. I am so guilty of that one. I give every little detail of the setting and the appearance of the people. We don't need to give everything to them. We do need to leave stuff up to imagination.

Kristen gives us an idea of what makes GOOD description. “The common denominator I see in great description is it delves beyond the surface and evokes some kind of feeling.” I know that my favorite books have descriptions that make me feel as if I'm there, makes me feel like I'm living there, working there, breathing there. It makes me feel something, so I can see where she's coming from here. She has some great examples of various types of descriptions on her blog.

Then she gets into weather/setting/information without being an info dump. She gives a brilliant example of what she's talking about. The example shows how we get a description of the weather and city, but it becomes more visceral, more of an experience rather than mere description. It's brought to us through the character's backstory and feelings.

One point she brings up is the amount is still subjective. What you want to do is what you should do, within reason. If it's part of your voice, use it. Just be aware that not all readers are going to like your level of description.

Seriously, go read her blog post. Check out her examples. And while you're there, check out some of her other blog posts.

Trigger Warnings on Books

Kristen Lamb had a stunningly well written blog post on Tuesday. It expressed her thoughts on a subject that's been on my mind lately: the thought of “trigger warnings” on books. I find myself ambivalent on the subject. On the one hand, I can see the reasoning behind people getting upset it, falling into the cultural facet of Empathetic Correctness. On the other hands I can see how warnings that would help people with PTSD and similar things prepare themselves for finding the scene in a book.

Huffington Post has a very interesting take on it. Their opinion is that it's not as bad as we're thinking, though it does have the potential to become a problem. A lot of what they say has to do with the fact that it would just be a few words on a syllabus warning those who have suffered past trauma that it's coming up, not that they aren't required to read the book for their classes.

The Guardian has a different point of view. They say that it's one step away from book banning. They hold forth on the fact that it's catering to a overly sensitive crowd of students who don't want to deal with the harsh realities of real life.

As I said, I can see the potential of both situations. On the one hand, I can see needing a few trigger warnings on things such as violent rape scenes, acts of domestic violence, things like that which could send someone spiraling back into a flashback of a terrible situation. But I also don't think that there needs to be trigger warnings for every little thing that might offend someone.

There's a difference between offending someone and actually triggering anxiety/fear flashbacks. The first is an act of pedantry. The second is something that can cripple someone emotionally. In dealing with the trigger warnings on books, if there is a violent rape scene I can see a warning about that in the book. It gives a person who has been raped the information it's coming and they can know what to expect, even brace themselves so they don't react as violently.

I use trigger warnings in some of my blog posts because I don't want someone having a flashback and losing control. I warn them what's in my post so they know what they're facing. This has driven some readers away. But others have come back and told me how much they appreciated the warning so they can prepare themselves for it.

There is such a thing as being too Empathetically Correct. The current trend for that is very disturbing. People aren't looking for success because they're being told everyone is the same. No one is reaching for anything because they expect to be given the same privileges as everyone else. The idea of over generalizing trigger warnings smacks of this.

Let's take a breath and do more research on it. I think everyone should get their voices in on this and let your opinion be known. If you're for it, that's great. If you're against it, that's great. Keep things civil and discuss it in the comments. Let me know what you think of all of this.

Flashbacks - good or bad

A flashback is “an interruption of the chronological sequence (as of a film or a literary work) of an event of earlier occurrence.”

There are so many blog posts and articles out there on flashbacks. People have different views on them. Here, on a blog with posts written by agents, is an interesting post on the effective use of a flashback. Some of the advice is write it as a complete scene, don't put it in the beginning of the book, insert a flashback after a powerful scene in the novel, give the time and place in the first sentence so as to not force your reader to try and guess it.

Then there's a different take on flashbacks. Not that they're necessarily wrong, but there is a different way to structure them and use them. Kristen Lamb – an author who if you're not already following her blog I'd start following it as soon as possible – has her own viewpoint on flashbacks. You can find her posts here,  here, and here.

There are several questions you need to ask yourself before inserting a flashback. You can find a good list of them here, but let me share just a couple with you: do you need to explain the character this much; will your story work without the flashback; is there any other way you can fill your audience in on the info.

I've run into a little of a quandary with Marked. Other than it's getting a total rewrite because it turned into goo in the middle and ended up making a mess of itself, I start the book with a flashback. It's in the form of a nightmare, a dream that has come to herald something bad happening to Aisling and those around her. Now, do I cut that and do it another way? I have her explain it later in the story when she's asked. Do I leave it in? What do I do with it? Right now...I don't know. I'm going to have to sort that out when I get back to it.

What are your views on flashbacks? Do you get jarred out of books or films when they're used? Have you used them yourself?