Goodreads and Page99Test

This is probably a little late for everyone, but for those who don't know, I am a registered author on Goodreads. So while I may not be the most chatty blogger, if you feel the urge to spy on what I am reading or have read you now know where to look. I will say this, though, I don't rate or write reviews. While I do have opinions on what I read, I rather not deal with ensuing, "But in your book....", "You're such a hypocrite", and the "You think your book is better than this one?" It's just a headache I don't feel like dealing with.

You can also find me on Page99Test. Sadly, whenever I try to make a link to the my post on the site it doesn't work, so telling all of you this may be for naught.

Anyway, back to the editing dungeon.

Efficiency vs Beauty

When I a write and edit I am always at war with myself. I always ask myself would it be better to write efficiently or poetically? For example, "He sliced the queen's head off. Droplets of blood flew off the axe, speckling Rosemary's cheeks as she watched in horror," or, "The axe fell like death's scythe, stealing the head off of the queen's pearl-white neck. The crimson that poured from that once unblemished neck, covered the edge of the axe. The momentum of the axe flung the blood that clung loosely to it into the air, and the specks rained onto Rosemary's cheeks as she gaped in horror."

The second is a lot more dramatic, and since it is a death scene, the latter would be the best choice, since I'm trying to make an impact. However, what about those times when the events that transpire are not so important? An extreme example would be the main character eating breakfast. Unless how the protagonist's toast is buttered is relevant to the plot, must I wax on about it?

Still, I read reviews and watch blogs in which people will complain that the language is too simplistic, or lacks creativity. I don't think it's wrong to want a book that does more with the language then simply use everyday jargon or string non-complex sentences together. Language can be quite beautiful, and it's wonderful that there are people out there that want that.

Even so, I love efficient writing. Some may like, "He hurtled down through the clouds like Icarus, swallowed by the sea." Yet I like, "He plummeted into ocean." It's so simple, and it gets the point across. Again, if the protagonist's fall is meant as a dramatic moment, I would be more inclined to choose the the first example. Even so, I appreciate the second sentence. It gives me the information I need to know, and then let's me move on with story.

In a world where a war is being raged over the average reader's attention between social media, video games, movies, work/school, family, and other forms of entertainment, is it wrong to respect the reader's time?

Yes, I don't want to read a novel that is merely dialogue with "he/she said" tagged on at the end followed by an action already repeated twenty times on the same page. At the same time, I don't have the patience to wade through pages of describing what the dinner table looks like, of the history aforementioned table (though I'm sure Tristan Shandy could pull it off marvelously).

Thus, I am always left torn when writing and editing as I try to search for a balance. Although, I think by now anyone who has read this post suspects, which way I tend to lean. I can't deny, when it comes down to it, unless the scene is dramatic/calls for beauty over efficiency,  I tend to agree with Shakespeare:

"Brevity is the soul of wit" (Hamlet Act 2, scene 2).

Although, even his quoted character went on and on:

"My liege, and madam, to expostulate
What majesty should be, what duty is,
What day is day, night night, and time is time,
Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time;
Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief. Your noble son is mad. . . ."

Really Polonius? You couldn't just say, "Your son is mad"?

Well, not like I can talk, considering this post...

Another Update

It's been a little over two weeks since I last posted, though I suppose that goes without saying.

There is not much to say. I still debate with myself what to do with this blog other than keep readers in the loop with what is going on book-wise. I'm still editing two novels. I sent the slightly older audience aimed book that I mentioned in my previous post to one of my lovely editors to get a better sense of what needs to be changed. As for book number two, I am personally working on it now. I've made some story changes, and now I'm focusing on flow, wording, spelling, and grammar. I can't deny the last two will always elude me. The day I become a cyborg with the ultimate spell check I'll be delighted, assuming I can still feel human emotions.

Perhaps as I get closer to publishing the novels I'll post a preview.

I suppose I could also look through old poems or short stories to see if anything stands out.

Until next time, readers.

What's the plan, Stan?

So now that Turning Curse is published, what's next?

Well, nothing is set in stone, but right now I am editing two novels. In a dream world, I would be able to publish them at the same time, but after all of the troubleshooting with Turning Curse, I'm very much aware how such plans can go awry.

I don't want to give too many details, because--again--things could change. At this point, one of the novels I'm working on has a similar tone and audience as Turning Curse. The second novel, however, is a little more somber and has a higher age range while remaining young adult. In some ways, I feel this second novel may be the one that will require the most work. The main character is abrasive, which can often alienate the reader.

So that is currently what's in the cards and could change at any moment.

On Frogs and Creative Desicions

So let's talk about frogs and writing.

I recently talked to one of my closest friends about Turning Curse, and how I knew made some "mistakes," and I'm not talking about typos (though I know I made them too. Curse me for being human and naturally flawed). So let's shed some light on these mistakes, and explain why they exist if I know they are mistakes.

The first and foremost one is "Frogs don't have fingers." Frogs have toes and legs. No fingers. No hands. Yet I constantly used fingers and hands when writing from a certain frog's point of view. I did this because it thought it would be a mouthful to say, "He outstretched his right, front leg" instead of "He outstretched his right hand."  I would like to think most readers, whether they are frog experts or not, know what I am trying to convey. Therefore, even though it is technically incorrect to use hands and fingers when talking about a frog, for the sake simpler sentences, and hopefully easier to understand sentences too, I am willing to make this mistake.

Another one is gritting/grinding teeth. Frogs have teeth, but only on the top of their mouths. Because their isn't a lower set of teeth it is inaccurate to say, frogs grit/grind their teeth, yet once again a certain frog is special. Like the previous paragraph stated, the decision to use such phrases came from wanting to remain simple and trusting the reader. The idea was to show the frog doing a similar motion to gritting or grinding his teeth. Imagine every time he did it if I wrote, "He moves his teeth in a grinding motion--not that he was really grinding them, because he had only his top row of teeth. His top teeth were really brushing his bottom lip."

I'm sure there are still people out there who will cry, "Mistake! Inaccurate!" and honestly, let them. They're correct. If it makes them throw the book at a wall or rant to all who will listen about how some author made an anthropomorphic frog...well, anthropomorphic, then that's what they choose to do with their time. As for my time, I got to get back to work editing some novels.

Love Fest: Charlie Brown

Do I even have to explain why Charlie Brown deserves a hug?

 This poor kid! He never does anything malicious, he usually helps out his friends, and he just tries so darn hard. Honestly, his worst character trait is his depression, and he has reasons to be depressed. Wouldn’t you be depressed if you were him? For crying out loud, candy hearts insult him. 

Really, it is just so painful to watch the Valentine’s Day special when Charlie wants just one Valentine and when he gets it, it’s a pity gift. Yet he still loves it so much. The fact that Charlie Brown can appreciate such a gift makes him deserving of the biggest hug.

Love Fest: Moro

There’s a lovely Miyazaki film by name of Princess Mononoke that has so many good elements in it, one could write a novel on the subject. However, this post is just to celebrate the awesomeness that is Moro.

Moro is a wolf god, who protects the forest that the humans, led by Lady Eboshi, destroys. Fierce and intelligent she has some of the best quotes in the movie. My personal favorite:

"I listen to the pain of the forest and feel the ache of the bullet in my chest, and I dream of the day I will finally crunch that gun-woman's head in my jaws."

Because she is more of a side character than a main one, it is hard to go into detail what makes Moro such an amazing character without giving spoilers. So in the vaguest of explanations, what it comes down to is Moro is a badass who embodies exactly what one would picture a wolf god to be. She doesn’t childishly attack humans because she hates them, but because they desecrate her home. At the same time, while she wants to protect her home, she acknowledges the dangers of going to war with humans. There’s just this perfect mixture of temper, violence, and wisdom that make her such a great character.