Jade Varden's Blog, page 36

Writing 101: Being Funny

Everybody likes laugh, and that's why writers who can be funny can also do very well. So now it's time to ask yourself: what do you know about being funny? 

So Why Don't You?
Being able to tell a joke well doesn't necessarily make you funny, but it sure as heck doesn't hurt. So if you can tell a joke and other people laugh, then you've got a shot at being funny in your books. You don't have to be a stand-up comedian to be capable of writing a book -- or at least, a book with some funny stuff in it. But you do have to know what it takes to be funny, because some of the same qualities that make comedians good can be translated onto the page.

Timing: Most comedians will tell you that being funny is all about the timing. What does that mean to authors? That means that stuff is funnier when it's unexpected. Surprise your audience with a funny remark or situation just when they're expecting something else.   Example: He leaned in closer, and I just knew he was about to kiss me. I was holding my breath as his lips came nearer and nearer to mine. My throat had gone dry, and I had a fluttery feeling that left me out of breath. His mouth was just about to touch mine when it happened. I sneezed all over him. Relief: You've heard the expression comedic relief before. This is a term that usually applies to a character who has been inserted into an otherwise tense or frightening situation. This person is around to crack a joke every once in a while, lightening the terrible tension of that situation. Make this work for you. Paint your readers a frightening picture, and then make it suddenly funny instead.  Example: There is was again, that creaking sound. I knew it well from all the nights I had to creep up the hallway, trying not to wake up my Mom. That's how I knew someone was in the hallway...coming closer to me. I had no choice: I went to the bedroom door. I had one chance to use the element of surprise to run past the intruder and get to safety. I took a deep breath as my hand tightened on the door knob. Then I pushed the door open, screaming! The intruder froze in surprise, and I darted around him. I would have made it, too...if it wasn't for that carpet with its one corner that wouldn't quite lay flat. My face was rushing toward the hardwood a second later, and somewhere behind me I heard my Dad shouting that I'd nearly given him a heart attack and what was I screaming about? Jokes: The hardest way to be funny as a writer is to tell jokes, be amusing, make 'em laugh. It really is hard to be funny, to think of funny things to say. Do people laugh when you're around? Do they laugh with you or at you? Do people tell you that you're funny? If so, you've got a shot at being genuinely funny in your books. But if you're not a funny person already it's going to be hard for you to write jokes into your books. Never forget that most importantly, you must be true to your own voice. If your humor is sarcastic, be sarcastic. Make wisecracks. If your humor is more about funny observations, then make them. And if you're more into toilet humor, get on into the bathroom because some people are totally into it. Don't try to force funny; usually, the opportunity will end up presenting itself. 
Being funny comes naturally to some people and probably to some authors, but the rest of us have to work at it a little. The best way to be funny is to simply get into the zone of writing. Make sure you're comfortable, and fed, and undisturbed. Get into the story. If you're enjoying yourself, your natural sense of humor should have the opportunity to shine in the right moments.

Writing 101: Everybody Says You Have to Read, Too

As I've mentioned before, I go looking for writing tips all the time. It never hurts to have help, and I don't care who you are. But there's one tip that I just keep on seeing, and seeing, and now I have to address it. Because everybody says you have to read, too. I'm going to tell you what's wrong in that tip. 

When Enough is Enough
I'm not saying that the tip is wrong in entirety. Yes, you should read. It's very important that one understands the mechanics of a novel if one is going to write a novel, this much is clear. And I'll take it even further by saying that you ought to read books across several different genres. It's not at all a bad idea to read classics, mysteries, romances, YA novels, horror novels, fantasy novels and any other darned thing that strikes your fancy.
If you're a lover of words, you're probably going to do all of this anyway. And if you become an indie author, you're probably going to read self-published books as well. But here's where I draw the line: you don't have to read all the time.


If you've already read a lot of books and you have to work and you've got to socialize and you have chores to do and errands to run and you need to try to write your own books in the middle of all of that, don't pile on. Don't spend a lot of time stressing that you might not be reading enough. Everybody says you have to read, too. And that's fine...but nobody says you have to just keep on doing it all the time.

Writing 101: Building Suspense

Building suspense is truly a fine art. If you can master it you can craft thrilling stories. But you may also be running your readers around in circles instead. Are you actually building suspense...or are you wasting my time? 

Writing in Circles

There is nothing more deliciously suspenseful than watching an Alfred Hitchcock movie, and knowing that something is about to happen. Sitting on the edge of your seat with your heart pounding, anticipation building and rising. But the thing about a Hitchcock movie is this: it's going to be over in 2 hours. So you know you're going to have to wait...but you also know the wait isn't going to inordinate. When it comes to suspensful novels, it's a whole different game.
Because novels might take much, much longer to payoff than your average Hitchcock movie. Making your readers wait a long time isn't necessarily the mark of good suspense, either. Sometimes, it just becomes a drawn-out, pointless plot that feels endless. And that gets pretty aggravating. If a picture is truly worht a thousand words, then this clip illustrates my point better than a few dozen blog posts ever could. Be warned, this clip isn't safe for work and it's not appropriate for children: 

Building suspense is about stretching your readers' patience...it's not about breaking it. The clip above is an example of what happens when a reader's patience is broken. They begin to harbor resentment. If you watched the rest of this South Park episode, you know that Butters went to author George R.R. Martin's home in order to complain.
Your readers don't have to go that far to complain to you...they can just find you on Twitter.
You want to build suspense until it stretches and stretches, but doesn't snap. That means you have to relieve the tension. You've got to provide that payoff to your readers. You can't just keep them on the hook for ever, because eventually they'll buck and they'll jump right off your line. And they'll swim away to read other books. 
Build suspense by continuously rewarding the reader for sticking with the story. Continue revealing information and making things happen. Continue bringing them closer and closer to the ultimate truth that they're seeking, and then give them what they want before it crosses the line into becoming annoying. When you can do that, you have mastered the art of building suspense.

Writing 101: Does It Need to Mean Something?

Lately, I've been asking myself a question about books: does it need to mean something? Does a book need to have some sort of merit, a reason for being, or is it okay to simply tell a story? 

What's It All Mean? 
I feel that I've been on both sides of this argument. I believe that, for the most part, people read way too much meaning into books. Even having a certain book in one's possession may carry some sort of meaning. People have been killed, I'm talking about murdered, because of a book. That's taking it too far, and I often say that all books should simply be taken at face value. Quit looking for meaning, just enjoy the story.
But like I said, I've also been on the other side of it. I read a book once that completely drained my life force and love of reading. It was long, long, long, and did nothing but run me around in circles before it ended in exactly the same place it began, more or less. And that book was almost enough to make me declare that all books ought to be fraught with meaning. They should all be penned with a purpose. This will keep me from wasting my time on one that's pointless. 
So when it comes to answering the title question, I'm torn. A book with meaning can be a dangerous thing (just look at how many wars the Bible has started). But a book with no meaning may feel boring, pointless...it may feel like a waste of time. 
There is an answer. No, a book doesn't need to mean something. It's fine, more than fine, to simply tell a story. Tell the story of one amazing day. Tell the story of a lifetime. Tell the story of an historical moment. Unravel a mystery. Fall in love. Experience grief. Do whatever you want, but do it well. Because while a book doesn't need to have a meaning, it does need to have something. 
It's not enough to write a book, and it's not even enough to tell a story. Make it worth my while. Make me feel something. Help me learn something. Give me something to do. If I can read your book and solve a murder, or discover what Paris looks like, or maybe cry for someone who is lost, then it's a good day. 
Your book doesn't need to have a meaning...but it does need to give the readers something they can take away from it.

Indie News: Self-Publishing as a First Choice, Not a Last Resort

For some reason, the word manifesto has always had a bit of a sinister connotation to it, to my ears. But this time, I'm willing to give Smashwords founder Mark Coker the benefit of the doubt.

Manifesto
Coker has written what he calls the Indie Author Manifesto. In it, Coker identifies 10 beliefs and values that he believes characterizes the self-publishing boom. 
Coker's most compelling point is a call to change the way readers and authors think about self-publishing. He says that once this was viewed as a last resort, someplace for failed authors to go. Coker thinks that needs to change, and he's hopeful that it is already changing. His prediction? In a couple of years, more first-time writers will want to self-publish than to traditionally publish their work. He says that indie authors will be "the cool kids."

Writing 101: Lecturing vs. Describing

So, I love historical fiction. I don't know why; I always hated history in school. And while I do love it, I've noticed something wrong with it: many writers start lecturing their readers instead of just describing the story to them. And while I've noticed it with historical writers more than others, this is an attitude into which even the most skillful can slip. So how do you prevent it? 

Blah, Blah, Blah
A novel should read a bit like a discussion. I should almost be able to hear your voice, and the voices of your characters, as I'm going through it. And that voice should have a natural rhythm, a specific rise and fall, a certain melody to it. It should not feel like a sermon. 
Even the best writers can start lecturing, and apparently never really realize that they're doing it. There was a book series, once, that I loved. The books were enormous but that was okay because I loved the story so much, and the author took such pains to make it accurate. And I mean, she really took pains. She told me about the plant life, the animal life, how to hunt them and where to pick it, the bugs, the leaves, the blades of grass, the wind blowing...at a certain point, it got to be a real drag. 
Not that I'm not into grass, or anything, but there was a problem with all this very rich description: it didn't have any interaction. 

Because I'm analytical, I started paying attention to the moments when I was most annoyed with the books in this particular series. And I found that I was most aggravated when the characters weren't doing much of anything but traveling past scenery, the latter described in exhausting detail. Seriously, if I wanted to look at scenery then I wouldn't be reading a book. 
So there's your first rule of avoiding the pitfall of lecturing your readers: interact with everything you're describing. Your characters shouldn't just look at the tree, or the peach on the counter. I want them to walk up and stand in the shade of the tree. I want to pick up the peach and taste it. If you're going to describe, then describe. Don't simply tell me how tall the oak tree is and how it makes a shadow on the grass. Put me in that cool spot and shield me from the sun. This is the difference between lecturing and describing. 
It's just not the only difference. Writers who slip into lecture mode have something else in common: specific details that just don't fit. I've caught myself doing this so many times, I've had to make a real effort to avoid it. When you're writing and you have all the research at your fingertips and you already know all the facts, it's very easy to start lecturing by making one very easy-to-make mistake: technicality. You know the oak tree is 80 feet tall, so you write it. Then I read it, and I realize I'm in the middle of the lecture. Because the 16 year-old-girl who is the central character in the story doesn't know that the tree is 80 feet. How the hell could she? Now I know you're lecturing me, because now I'm no longer seeing the story through that girl's eyes. 
It seems like a fine point to pick at, I know, but trust me it makes a big difference. Everything should be coming from the right point of view, and in almost all novels that point of view is not going to be your own. So don't tell me that the tree is 80 feet tall and 10 feet wide. Tell me that it's even taller than the 6-story apartment building where so-and-so lives, and even wider than the long driveway in front of it. Everything should come from a frame of reference that's familiar to the characters in the story, not one that's familiar to you. This is a little harder to write, but this makes your story much more authentic. It also puts an end to the lecturing. 
Don't lecture to me by simply telling me what something looks like. Put me right in that space with that thing, and allow me to see it through your character's eyes. I don't want you to draw a picture of a tree for me with your words, because I've seen trees and if I need a description of a tree I'll go to the online encyclopedia. There are only 200 of them. What I want is to know how this tree is affecting the character, or the space around the character, what it means and why it matters. I already know how I see trees. I'm reading because I want to know how someone else sees trees. That's your job. And if you're not lecturing, then that means you're doing your job the right way.

Writing 101: With No

With no effort on your part whatsoever, you may make a glaring grammatical error that you don't even recognize. At least, that's what happened to me recently. I was using a different word processing program than usual, and just like that it pointed out a mistake that I've made countless times. That's how I found out that I shouldn't be using with and no together. These words just can't pair up...because without exists.

With No Rules...
With no grammar rules, the world might be a better place...but unfortunately, the rules do exist. And as authors, we are compelled to follow them. So that's why I fully expect to be lambasted for using the words with no...because you're just not supposed to use it. Let me show you why. 
First, I'll correct my own mistakes. The top of this post ought to read Without effort on your part whatsoever... and the top of this section should say Without grammar rules... because this is what's correct. Let's look at a few more examples of what's correct in writing:
She marched forward without fear.
Without words, we cannot communicate. 
I don't know what I'd do without you.
Now technically, I can replace the word without in each of the examples above and replace it with the phrase with no. The meaning wouldn't change, but the melody of the words would. Try reading each sentence out loud, both ways, and you'll hear how wrong it all sounds. With no strikes a discordant note; without flows with the natural rhythm of the words.  It's particularly unstable in the last sentence.
I don't know what I'd do with no you. 
The meaning is the exact same, but this sentence is grammatically incorrect. And because it's incorrect, you can hear the rough places in the sentence if you say it to yourself. Without is the correct way to express any thought that can be conveyed with the phrase with no instead. Use this instead and your words will flow better. Even more importantly, your words will be more technically correct. 
And without any errors in your writing, readers will be free to praise your storytelling instead. So don't give them something to pick over. Use without, because that's the right word, and make all your other words sound more melodious.

Writing 101: Should It Be a Series?

You've written a book, and you love how it turned out. You feel a strong connection to the characters, you know the setting like no one else. You've gotten some good reviews. So should you continue with the story? Should that book...become a series? 


Sequels and Whatnot
When it comes to extending a story and adding extra books, my answer is almost always yes. I can't even tell you how many times I've asked myself, and the Heavens, why Margaret Mitchell didn't write a sequel to Gone With the Wind. 
But I have seen the other side of that coin as well. I love Anne Shirley as much as any girl who saw the movie because the movie was fantastic, but I think we can admit to ourselves that 8 books for that series was too damned many books. No one really wanted to see Anne grow up an have an entire brood of crazy-acting children, and no one really wanted to see her go through real tragedy. It was too much; that series should have ended with a wedding and I'm not afraid to say it. When your heroine has gray hair it's just not a YA book, okay?
And when I'm honest with myself, I know that a Gone With the Wind sequel would never have worked anyway. This has proven itself to be true, because people have tried to do it. Some stories do stand alone, and some heroines can live on only in our imaginations and never on the page.
Besides, that's what fan fiction is for. 
So what if you're still stuck somewhere between an 8-book series that's just too much and a stand-alone story that could have more to say? Should it be a series...and how do you decide?
Loose Ends: Unanswered questions. Unresolved plots. Lingering doubts. If there are just too many questions remaining at the end of your book then yes, write a sequel and turn it into a series. I hate loose ends. Most readers hate loose ends. It's okay to leave a little bit up to the readers' imaginations, but don't forget that your main job as a writer is to imagine for them so you can't make them do too much work.Popularity: Let's not pretend that popularity doesn't play a part. If you've written a book that people are crazy about and you're getting a lot of comments asking for a sequel then don't be ridiculous. Supply the fans with the story they are demanding and take your proper place in the flow of book commerce. You may be writing for the love of the written word, but you still need to eat food to survive. Resiliency: I wrote a book once that just wouldn't go away, even after it was polished and edited all to heck and back. I kept on thinking about it, to the point of distraction. I couldn't get my mind right until I started writing a sequel, even though I swore the story would stand alone. If you can't write anything else, you really haven't got much choice about it have you? Some stories just have to get all the way out of your system first. 
Look at these three factors, and none other. Stick to the right criteria before you answer your own question...should it be a series?

Writing 101: Focus on Your Local Market

I think every author dreams of being an international success, crossing oceans like J.K Rowling, becoming a household name like Stephen King. But before you can make it big, you have to start small. You have to focus on your local market.

Hometown Hero
For most, fame and fortune does not come overnight. As an author, you have to win readers over one at a time. When you throw your book into an ocean made up of books, yours can become lost. So try putting it in a pond instead.
Try winning over your local market. Get  started with a few ideas:
Target tweeters: Look for people in your hometown or city on social media, particularly local personalities. Teachers, local news celebs, librarians -- start following them, and maybe they'll follow back.Make new friends: Join local book clubs and writer workshops, and get to know the people there. If you become known as an author within the local author community, you could develop new contacts and gain more local opportunities.Pound the pavement: Put together a small package, preferably something digital that you can display on a tablet, and pitch yourself to local bookstores. Maybe they'll be willing to include print copies of your books or host an event for you. At the very least, try to get them to display some of your bookmarks somewhere in the store.
Focus on your local market. If you build a reputation for yourself there, you'll have a strong foundation to build upon so you can start expanding your reach.

Indie News: Are eBooks Making Us Dumber?

The ebook boom has touched us all, and the indie author more than most, but is all this change really a good thing? According to one study, maybe not. In fact, ebooks could be fundamentally changing the way we read.

eReading

A recent study of students showed both the good and bad side of ebooks. Students who were given ebooks wanted to read more than those who received print books, but the students who used ereaders comprehended less than those who used paper. It's because, one expert says, the device itself is a distraction from reading.
Your attention may be diverted from what you're reading if you're holding a device that can also shop, play movies and give you instant access to hundreds of other books. So is more information and wider availability in books really such a good thing, or does it only mean that books will have even more trouble standing out from the pack?