Sympathetic vs Likable Characters

In my reviews, I talk a lot about characters and whether or not they're sympathetic. Many writers want their characters to be likable, especially their main character. After all, the reader has to spend an entire book with the main character, and why would they devote that much time with a character they didn't like? It can sometimes get tricky to keep a character likable, especially when characters begin doing unethical things in the name of the greater good. At what point does a character stop being likable? At what point do they stop being sympathetic? Though the two are related, they are definitely two different concepts that many writers get mixed up. Writers can sometimes become so obsessed with making their character likable that they forget to make their character sympathetic.

But what is the difference? 

When your character is likable, they are someone your reader enjoys reading about. This relies more heavily on personal preference and so it's sometimes impossible to create a universally liked character, though many writers lose sleep trying to create one. A character can be two dimensional, crude, rude, erratic in their actions, and completely unsympathetic, but they may still be likable if there is something about the character the reader connects with and enjoys. A character can be likable because they are sympathetic, but they don't have to be sympathetic to be likable. 

When your character is sympathetic, they are doing something or expressing ideas that the reader can approve of. They are working to save their world, rescue their parents, save their love interest, etc. Even if as a person, they are incredibly unlikable, your character can still be sympathetic by doing the right thing. 

For example, in my review of The Outliers, I talk about how much I disliked the main character, Wylie. This was mostly due to personal preference, as Wylie did things and said things that I thought were rude and uncalled for. However, her overall motivation throughout the story-- saving her best friend-- was something I could sympathize with, and therefore I could continue reading. It's like the idea of people working together in a crisis-- I can deal with not liking a character based on who they are, so long as their actions or ideas are sympathetic. 

But where do you draw the line? How do you know if you're writing a likable character, or a sympathetic one? Or neither? Or both? 

As I said, creating a likable character can be frustrating and nearly impossible, mostly because it generally comes down to personal preference. There are people who love Voldemort, despite the fact that JK Rowling made no attempt to make him likable. You cannot control how people will respond to your characters, just as you can't control how people respond to your personality. So don't even try. Don't focus on making people like your character, make your character consistent with who they are. If you want a stubborn character, don't tone down that trait to make them more likable. Embrace the stubborn part of your character, make it consistent through their actions and reactions, and readers will like your character for being true to themselves. 

On the other hand, creating a sympathetic character is something a writer does have control over, and should pay attention to. Generally, it's not hard to make your character a sympathetic one. Plot motivators tend to make for sympathetic situations-- needing to rescue a loved one, stop a catastrophe, free people from suffering, etc. But you don't need those external motivators to create sympathetic characters, as their beliefs and ideas have a big impact on how the reader views them. For example, your character may be a high class thief only out for personal gain, but their decision not to hurt people while on the job instantly makes him a sympathetic one. 

External elements to create sympathy are the easiest to do. Internal motivators to create sympathy have a much stronger impact. Your character can have both external and internal motivators to create sympathy, or only one or the other. Toeing the lines can create interesting character dynamics and is something authors tend to do frequently. 

In the Second Sons Trilogy by Jennifer Fallon, the main character, Dirk, has external motivators to make him sympathetic, but no internal motivators. He is working to save the kingdom by toppling a corrupt system, not necessarily for the betterment of his fellow people, but more because the structure of the royal court puts him in danger. He is all around unlikable-- arrogant, snobby, and really doesn't do a single nice thing throughout the whole series unless it serves him, despite the fact that he is doing the "right" thing. Jennifer Fallon admitted that she intended to do this with Dirk-- she wanted to see how bad a main character could be while still keeping the reader on his side. And it certainly worked! By the end of the series I thought Dirk was pretty much the scummiest guy you could meet, but he somehow still managed to remain the hero of the story. 

On the other side of the coin, in Vicious by VE Schwab, the main character Victor has internal motivators without much in the way of external motivators. He chases down his best friend who has become a serial killer, and though his expressed motivation is based on revenge (which doesn't make him overly sympathetic), he does acknowledge that he thinks what Eli is doing is wrong. So even though his external motivation is a choice of him getting revenge, his internal motivation makes him sympathetic as it shows he cares about others. 

Characters can be a hard balance. I speak from experience, as they've always been something I've struggled with. But managing that balance, once you have it, makes your book so much stronger overall. 

So, since I threw a lot at once, to sum up: 

Likable Characters are those who are liked by the reader, for one reason or another. All characters are likable in some way. Likable characters are based on reader preference. Generally, good deeds = people like your character, but the reasons a character is likable are as varied as types of literature. 

Sympathetic Characters are those whose actions, motivations, or beliefs, whether its proclaimed from the rooftops or inserted subtly, create sympathy and approval for the reader. They approve of the hero's journey, or at least their reasons for the journey. 

External Motivators for Sympathy are external forces that put the character into a situation that garners sympathy. They can be as literal as people locked in a cage needing to escape, or pressures from other characters to do things they don't want to. 

Internal Motivators for Sympathy are more the beliefs and morals held within the character that propels them to take action and creates sympathy in the reader. They can be stated outright or implied. They still inspire sympathy and originate from the character's belief system. 

Hopefully this helps to shed some light on what I mean when I talk about sympathy vs likability. So writers out there, relax, take a deep breath. Stop pulling your hair out trying to make your characters liked by everyone, and just make your characters true to themselves. 

What's in a Number?

Just an average day at work

I work in a mental health office for kids and their families, but my immediate surroundings are filled with people at least twice my age, and most of my correspondence is with people who could probably be my grandparents, let alone my parents.

I'm 23 and work as the file manager in an institution filled with kids with severe mental health issues, Talk about inspiration for writing, am I right? I've been in this position a few years and worked very hard to get where I am, and in the last year or so I've encountered some prejudice from some of the people I work with. These are some of the most caring people in the world, those who devote themselves to trying to help people, who work non-profit, and yet I still encounter what you would call "micro aggressions" from them. All because of my age.

It's nothing rude, mind you. Just talking over me, talking to my boss or coworkers on issues and departments that I not only approach them on, but that I am the sole person working on. It's frustrating to be treated in a way that undermines all the work I do, simply because of my age. It reminds me of my teenage years, fists clenched, eyes blazing, demanding to be treated like an equal and not an idiot.

Back in those days, I wrote furiously. Every free moment (and during the classes I skipped), were filled with furious typing. Even back then I was obsessed with having an authentic voice. I was determined that as I grew older, I would never allow myself to resent kids and look down on them. But more so, I never wanted to forget what it felt like to be a teenager. I didn't want to turn into an adult that didn't think teenagers had opinions or issues or dreams.

I never wanted to become what I hated.

As I grew into a young adult, graduated high school, dabbled around in university, it all seemed too easy. It felt like growing up was impossible, but even then I knew my voice had shifted. What I wrote was and is so affected by my life because those issues and ideas are what's writing from my heart. I let my voice shift and experimented with new things, But I also kept writing YA, right up to when I got my job at the mental health agency and began a shift of focus in my life.

I began volunteering with the kids at the agency, those who lived on the campus where I worked, some who had undergone unspeakable tragedies, abuse, had lost their parents, were parents themselves, and on and on. Yet at the heart of it these were still just kids, and I saw a lot of myself from just a few years ago in them. I'm close enough in age to some of them that a kid will play a song that's on my iPod and I can't help but bust out a jam. Yet despite how close in age I am, there is a world of difference between me and them, between who I was and who I am. And it made me realize something.

Adults cannot write young adult fiction without having some contact with kids and teens. Whether you're a parent, a teacher, work in child care, have friends who have kids, volunteer with kids-- you cannot create an authentic voice and story for kids and teenagers without actually talking to some.

Yes, yes, we were all kids once. And that experience is vital to creating fiction for teens. But you also have to accept that you're looking at it all through the lens of an adult. Your experiences since you were 16 have vastly changed you and how you view the world. There is plenty of adult fiction out there starring teenagers-- it's not considered YA because it is written with an adult audience in mind and so touches on thoughts and experiences that teenagers won't relate to as much.

What makes YA, YA? The target audience.

A "positive thought" left in my Positive Thoughts Bowl at work, written by a teenage client. Sorry it's crappy quality.

It's great that so many adults read young adult fiction these days. Hell, I'm an adult that reads YA. But I'm not who it's written for. The voices and experiences it needs to reflect are for those teenagers out there looking for something to relate to. They want a reading experience that speaks to them, and that is the entire point of young adult. It's to give a voice to teenagers and children. And the only way to successfully do that is to talk to teenagers, interact with them in some way or another. Consider it research, a very important kind.

Yeah, I hear you. Sometimes teenagers suck, Especially the ones that roll their eyes at you, or call you a little c**t, or get charged with assault. But just reading other YA novels as research into the "current" teenage experience isn't enough. That's a dangerous way to create a circle-jerk of outdated or false information. If you don't actually take the time to relate to those you're actually trying to market to, you run the risk of talking over your audience instead of giving them a voice.

What does that look like? It looks like creating a 'moral' for your readers to take away. It's purposefully forging characters to be perfect role models instead of creating true to life people. It's minimizing what might be 'offensive' or 'inappropriate' or  what you 'don't think kids/teens can handle.' It's assuming you know what's best for them and undermining their intelligence. It's inauthentic and kids can always tell.

If you really want to inspire a lifelong love of reading and literature in kids and teenagers, you have to create authentic experiences they can relate to, and touch on ideas and emotions that will leave lasting impressions on them. If you only focus on imposing a moral or lesson on them, on speaking over them, then it feels too much like work or school or the rules they're used to at home. If they sense the catch, they will drop your book in a heartbeat and probably drop reading not long after, if every other book they read is the same experience.

When you start to think you know what's best for young readers, you take away their autonomy, which is so vital in a world where young people seem to have so little of it. It's such an easy thing to do, and I'm certain I'm guilty of looking down my nose at those younger than me at times. In order for me to keep my promise to my younger self, to keep my voice authentic and true to the teenage experience, I will get to know my target audience and do my best to always be the conduit to their voice, and not its silencer.

I hop you will too.

How To Make FEELS (Or Drawing from Within)

In our weird little society, both inside the internet and out of it, we're always trying to put on a brave face and chase away those emotions we don't quite like. We show people our successes (Got a book deal! Wrote X amount of Words today!) but shy away from sharing anything really negative about ourselves. After all, who likes a Negative Nancy? People who are constantly negative bring you down and you don't want to spend time with them (let alone a whole book with them), but the opposite holds true as well. When we're all sunshine and roses and success stories, sometimes people can find it hard to relate to us. No one's life is perfect. I believe this stands through in writing as well as real life. Struggle helps us sympathize with others. If you have the Mary Sue MC who never runs into any troubles, it's easy to dismiss her as unrealistic.

So why do we insist on dulling down our negative emotions, hiding them away, and pretending the world is simply full of Mary Sues?

Emotion and writing go hand in hand because emotion and life go hand in hand. If you as a writer are feeling something really strongly while writing-- if your own story pulls anger or surprise or general shock from you, you have a greater chance of eliciting that response in the reader. But how do you tap into that swell of emotion? How do you find the right words to bring it out?

I believe the first step is acknowledging your own emotions throughout your day to day life.

Do you try to shut down anger, or put it away for later? Do you hide feelings of grief or sadness behind a big smile? Why? Because other people might be put off of your negative sides?

Currently, I set today out to write. Write, write, write. But I woke up in a horribly depressed mood. I just want to openly weep over my keyboard for no good reason. Usually I use this as an excuse to avoid writing. After all, it's next to impossible to form decent sentences when it feels like my brain is moving through molasses. But the scene I'm currently writing is a sad one, so I forced myself to sit down and write, because as I feel nearly exactly like my character would feel, it gives me an opportunity to look inside and understand what that really feels like and then find the words to convey that to someone else.

Often when I'm writing, my character may come across a situation I couldn't even imagine. Their best friend is killed. They have to undertake a massive responsibility. Yes, I can go with the most obvious way they may feel about those things, but I often feel like that's not enough. We don't have a "boo hoo" moment when someone close to us dies, we have a long lasting grief that can affect us in multitude of different ways.

When you hit those moments where you're angry beyond belief, when you're shattered inside, or even when you're so overjoyed you don't know what to do with yourself, take a moment. As a writer, take yourself inside your own experience. Try to describe to yourself how it feels. How would you make a reader understand what this feeling is like? You may not be slaying dragons or dealing with your friends being murdered, but the foundation of those feelings is there in your everyday life. When putting characters through those larger than life situations, we can take what we've learned from introspection and what it feels on a small scale, and then blow it up to larger than life proportions that suit your character's situation.

We specialize in the human condition. Life is long but unfortunately book pages are few. To create something really poignant, you need to take as many opportunities as possible to really make your character feel. Utter disappointment. Failure. Depression. Motivation. Joy. Elation. Lust. More so, those emotions are much more powerful when you can touch on what it really feels like. How many times have you had minorities of any kind (Disability, mental illness, POC, LGBT, etc) look at something and say, "This isn't right. This isn't what it's like." The same can be happen for feeling, for events that cause those feelings, and for inaccurate responses to those situations. It's why I take some time to think how my character (not just anyone, but the character I've built so far) may feel about something.

We'll never get it perfect, because everyone is different and experiences things differently. There will always be people who say, "That's not right," regarding how your character reacts to a situation, how they feel about something, what they get angry at, etc. It's because of the diversity of the human race, and it's that diversity that we really want to capture. If every character reacted how they were "supposed" to, it would create the same story over and over again, invoke the same feelings. As artists, we're always looking for something new.

So take some time each day and consider how you're feeling. Take a break from reality and ask yourself how you reacted to that snide comment from a coworker. Consider how missing breakfast made you feel and affected your mood. Often there is so much going on within us that we disregard in favour of focusing on the outside world, but that inside world is where we find humanity, which every reader is looking for.

What are your thoughts? How do you go about capturing emotion? Let me know!

When Books Take Flight

Photo help/credit goes to Adrian Gaucher (@nobodieshero). He's got skillz!

In meme theory, there's this idea that ideas are alive, subject to evolution, reproduction, death and extinction like any other creature. The theory can sometimes be questionable at best, but I think in the case of stories and books, it is absolutely true. Any reader will tell you a novel is alive, that a story has the ability to completely transform them and their worldview, as well as remain alive in them for many years.

A good book, story, snippet, quote, semblance of words, whatever, has the ability to touch on deep human emotions. It inspires and sparks something in you, even if it's as simple (and "simple" is of course taken with a grain of salt) as your enjoyment or a love of a character's witty or sassy voice, something resonates there. The best books stay with you for years, you dwell on their ideas and characters, spend time creating fanart or participating in discussions, write fanfiction, reread the book, and most importantly, talk about it with those you care about. When we find something really special, we want to share it with others around us. This is where the meme theory comes in. Truly well-composed books that resonate and inspire want to be shared, and meme theory argues that it is not us sharing them, but the stories controlling us in order to live on and reproduce, like any other creature.

Not long ago I took a look at my bookshelf and noticed something odd. Almost all my shelves were filled with books I didn't particularly enjoy, or that I had given up on, or that I read but hated. But, when I thought about my reading experience, I didn't remember bad books. I remembered all the wonderful stories that I had read, the ones that truly made me feel and motivated me, and realized that, one by one, I had given them all away.

There are some collectors out there that are probably aghast at the thought that I have lost so many books simply by "lending" them out to people and then never seeing them again. Some were given away with the knowledge that they weren't coming back, such as with giveaways, where I get so excited about a book that I have to give it to someone, anyone, so long as they'd appreciate it. I like to think of it as the best books growing wings and taking flight, ideas growing and wanting to spread and evolve. The ones that are the most alive, the most vivid, end up flying off in the hopes that someone else will be touched and inspired by the story.

A book is often not born of one person anyway. Sure, there is someone who sits down and pens the story, but writing a book, as the acknowledgements will show, is never a one man job. There are editors involved, agents, beta readers, friends and significant others and writing partners that offer tips and ideas and changes. All of these edits and ideas are offered through so many different lenses. Seemingly, a writer doesn't write the book at all, and it comes to being all on its own. Wouldn't that be nice. The metaphor definitely ends there, as any writer knows that though sometimes the ideas seem to come together out of nowhere, it definitely takes a butt load of uphill work before anything looks remotely story-like.

It may seem like a whimsical and silly way to look at writing and creativity sometimes, but often when I get touched by something really special, like Dreams of Gods and Monsters and the rest of the Smoke and Bone trilogy, it makes me want to believe in whimsy and magic. At the end of the day, behind every bit of magic, there is hard determination and passion. And as a fellow writer, I'm always trying to dissect what about a book makes it so magical, and how I can achieve similar responses in my readers. After all, isn't it every writer's dream to write something that has that bit of magic in it?

I've learned a lot of things from studying the books that have really touched me. What makes them so magical? Of course, they need to have the fundamentals down.

1) A solid plot with little to no flaws or holes with intricate devices that keeps the story interesting and interwoven. Loose ends and holes can sink even the strongest stories.

2) Dynamic characters with conflicts between each other that are both interesting and sympathetic. The best characters are those with well thought out flaws and strengths with places to grow and fail as the story progresses.

3) A consistent tone/voice that sets it apart from the competition.

4) They must touch on something real.

Real? What is real? It's that bit of magic that turns a good book into a great book. That bit of heart that takes it to the next level. Donald Maass, literary agent, once wrote that it involved touching on timeless human experiences that many people can understand or relate to. A superhero book by Perry Moore called Hero did this by touching on the real lives behind his superhero characters, the wounds in their lives, whether they were physical, emotional or otherwise, and his main character who learned the true strength of his healing powers. Though this story was told through the lens of a superhero world, it still involved real world issues that people can relate to, even just emotionally.

In Dreams of Gods and Monsters, many could say that Laini Taylor's Eretz and its struggles of independence are no different than any other major fantasy story out there. What truly sets it apart, of course, is the originality, tone, and its ability to really touch on why this dream is so important to these characters. Yes, they want to save their world, but at the end of the day they just want to be together, in peace, in a world where people didn't have to hide and fight and die. But the way Taylor presents it is such a raw, emotional way that you really feel the loss of war and the yearning for the dream. The heart behind it is what elevated this book out of good to great, from bookshelf quality to taking flight.

Whenever I sit down in front of my computer, or my typewriter (nerd alert) I always ask myself what feeling I intend to inspire with my writing. What piece of humanity am I trying to touch on? In this scene, right now, what is the reader feeling? Are you only focusing on entertaining them? Because that will always leave you on the bookshelf.

They say every idea has been done. And it has. The difference is the execution, and how much of a heart you give the creature you're creating. A story with a strong heart will fly from reader to reader so it can spread and live on for a long, long time. No heart? No life, and your book will face plant before it can ever take flight.

Peace,

-Katie

Authors, have you been "leading" your audience?

We've all been there. You've picked up a new book and you're whipping through pages. You love some of the characters, the story has got you hooked and you're definitely enjoying the ride. But then you begin to notice something strange. You seem to be "led" in certain directions, not by the character or the narrator, but the author. You notice the way certain characters are described seems over the top, while other major characters are mostly ignored in comparison. How does it make you feel when you realize the author is trying to manipulate you into feeling certain ways about their book?

It sounds like a bit ridiculous, doesn't it? But it's true. As authors, we attempt to manipulate readers in many different ways. We ask ourselves "How can I make readers sympathize with this character?" "How do I play out this relationship so X character will not be seen as an idiot?" It's not a bad thing to be aware of what effect our writing is having on our readers. After all, we want readers to feel sympathy if we kill off a character, we want their hearts to swell and sink with each exciting plot point. But I believe there's a limit, and after a certain point the author is not so much telling a story as leading a reader through it.

The book I'm currently reading has a bad habit of trying to "lead" me, and it's not a new occurrence among young adult books. When the MC is introduced to a new character, "leading" authors tend to specialize the introduction. Is this your character's love interest? They'll probably have a cool entrance where they are the spotlight of the scene, where your MC is overly focused on them. Their descriptions may seem overdone, or they over focus on features that are supposed to be desirable--their attitude, their clothing, or even just the fact that they're "a good person but a little crazy in certain respects." Not all of it is negative, but it definitely feels like the author is pushing a character forward, like a helicopter parent putting their child on a pedastal and saying "Okay, go ahead and adore him."

It's perfectly reasonable that your MC should see your love interest as the spotlight, but sadly it's come to a place where it seems a character's role can be predicted based solely on how the author presents them upon their first couple scenes. When you MC meets the "third wheel" character, the person your MC may flirt with but not ultimately "fall in love with," the way that character is presented takes away all our mystery. They're introduced as a side character, with some thrown in tidbits about their life, but for the most part they recieved about as much attention as the description of your MC's house. So, why should I care about this character, when based on your introduction, I know he not only won't stand a chance of being with the MC, but that his part will probably be cut down or minimized? The author is saying without words that he is not worth me paying attention to.

There is a thin line between narrator and author at times. The narrator can be your MC, or simply the voice that has developed to tell your story. When you're in the MC/narrator's head, you need to ask yourself what it is they are focusing on AT THIS VERY MOMENT. I think a lot of authors get caught up in what's to come, and it ends up tarnishing the moment. Take the introduction of a love interest. Your MC has no idea what future lays between them and this new character. It's exactly the same as meeting a new person in real life. Yes, there are moments (especially as a teenager) when meeting someone is love at first sight, where birds are singing and the heavenly choir is christening your union. But about 99% of the time that is NOT the case, so why is it that YA likes to paint it the opposite way? When your MC meets their LI, you need to focus on the real moment feelings of the characters, instead of instilling little author clues of "Hey, there might be romance here!" Because honestly? The best romance is the one you never saw coming.

Leading readers in this way can be severely limiting, but also can be used as a great tool if you're aware of what you're doing. A great example of this would be Unearthly by Cynthia Hand. Throughout much of the book, the author leads you to focus on Christian as being the main love interest. The way she paints him makes the reader make a lot of assumptions about him, meanwhile Tucker was introduced and played out in many of his initial scenes as a side or background character. And this made so much sense for the book, because our MC, Clara, at the time is fully invested in Christian, putting him in the spotlight in her mind, while Tucker is just that annoying kid in class. As opposed to many other books, which use leading to bring the reader to the conclusion the author wants, Cynthia Hand led her readers to cliched conclusions, allowed the reader's assumptions to get the better of them, and then twisted it and changed the entire flow of the story to create a thrilling and surprising tale. (If you dig angels and haven't picked it up yet, YOU MUST.)

I like to think of leading readers as using blinders on a horse. As an author, you can highlight certain traits, bring the reader's attention to specific details, and by doing so you are putting blinders on them. This is not necessarily a negative thing, as sometimes readers and horses need to be focused, but if you leave them on all the time, the reader will not be able to fully experience your world. They will only have the story you drew for them, the conclusions you led them to, which takes away from one of the most important and exciting parts about reading: discovery.

So You Want to Write a Novel: Part One -- The Idea

So you want to write a novel: Part 1 – the Idea

I’ve come across dozens of people who, after I tell them I’m a writer, say to me, “I’ve always wanted to write a book.”

Why don’t you?

If you’ve somehow stumbled onto my blog, then you’ve made the conscious decision to start reading up on this marathon that you want to undertake. Because writing a book is a marathon that lasts a few weeks for some, and a few years for others. But how do you get started? I’m about to start writing a new book myself, so I thought I’d catalogue the step-by-step process, from idea to agent, to give some of you a glimpse into how the process works.

Disclaimer: This is my process. It’s different for every person. Do NOT feel pressured to conform to one way of writing. We all have to find our groove, this is only one option.

What do you need when you get that brilliant idea? How do you go from inspiration to chapter one? Honestly, this is the craziest part of the process for me. For several weeks beforehand, I go through a “musings” phase. This is when I absorb as much inspiration as possible, stretch my creative muscles and let my ideas take form in my subconscious. Often I need some time to sit back and think about everything before I even get started.

Once I’ve got all the Thinking done, I move onto writing some of this down in note form. Before I start a novel, there are some things I NEED to know. I’ve learned it’s far easier to plan, plan, plan than to go back and try and fix major plot issues later down the road. Some writers don’t like to do as much notes as I do—often they take an idea and just run with it. I do this too in some ways, but in order for me, personally, to take writing from a hobby to a profession, I need to stop saying to myself, “Ah, I’ll figure it out later” and start with, “Let’s deal with this now.”

Many things change from beginning to end, but before anything happens, I need to know The Bare Bones:

Characters:

 Main Character

è Who are they when they’re alone? Are they quiet? Easily bored? Extroverted? Introverted? Do they prefer a loud party or a quiet walk through the park?

è Who are they with people? How do they act around those they like? Those they hate?

è What motivates them? What do they want more than anything in the world?

è What makes them angry? What gets them depressed? What makes them want to give up?

è What is their biggest dream? Their biggest fear?

Once I’ve answered all these questions, I move on to secondary characters, a love interest, and antagonists. Planning out things like appearance, nationality, sexuality, ect., are just as important, but I find those very easy to plan out, so I try to focus on the things that aren’t always so obvious to me.

Note: Antagonists don’t necessarily have to be characters, but they must be well-thought out. Your antagonist is just as important as your protagonists, and must have wants and desires that are as believable as your MC’s.

Plot:

 Main Plot:

è What is the major problem at hand?

è Who/what stands against the MC? Why?

è How does your MC plan to fight back to achieve his/her goals?

Subplots:

Subplots can be a great thing, so long as they don’t overcrowd your story. I always tend to overdo it, so I try and plan out which subplots will play an active role.

à Decide on what kind of subplot you want. Is it a romance subplot? One of self-discovery? One related to the MC’s family/home life?

è Why is it in your book? Is it really necessary, or is it simply a darling you don’t want to kill?

è What does it add to your story?

Setting:

Your setting is, in a sense, its own character. It should receive just as much attention as the other components of your novel.

Basic:

è Where are you setting your story? Why?

è Does this setting have a connection to your characters/plot?

è How does your atmosphere reflect your story?

Worldbuilding:

è How does your world function? Even if you’re writing a contemporary novel, the town/city you set it in should have its own unique characteristics.

è Where do people get their food/water/medical supplies, ect?

è How does the landscape affect how the people live?

è What is unique to the world you’ve created?

è What beliefs/prejudice/myths are prominent in your culture?

Voice:

è What POV will you use? Is it 3^rd person, 1^st, or 2^nd? Do you have an omniscient narrator? How many narrators will you use? Is this in present or past tense? (Or perhaps future tense?) And of course—WHY?

è What tone will you use? How does your narrator affect your word choice, diction, style, ect?

è How will these decisions affect the story you’re trying to tell?

Research:

è What don’t I know that will better my story in some way or another?

è What things could I incorporate into my story? What is something I’ve been interested in that might work well with what I’ve already chosen to write about?

Anything else?

è Is there anything I want to plan out before I start writing? (Certain deaths, character traits, plot twists, ect?)

 

Once I've answered all these questions, and I feel I have a decent grasp on my idea, the characters and the world, I move onto the opening pages.

 

Oh joy. Those damn opening pages.

 

TBC...

Labeling Characters

Not long ago I was on Twitter, and the topic of conversation during a #GayYA chat was on labels. Are they good, are they bad, and whether you or your characters chose to use them. And it got me thinking. Labels affect more than just gay teens, so I wanted to open this up to discussion.

What are labels in fiction? Labels in fiction reflect labels in real life. Things that may not necessarily be negative, but define you in a very specific way. There is a difference between descriptors and labels. A descriptor is a very general way of describing someone. A label has a little different connotation. It usually comes with background stigmas or expectations from society.

To explain it a little better, a descriptor could be referring to another as a "redhead." This is general, and there's not much hidden meaning beneath the surface. But change that for a label such as "ginger" and you've got a different story. Calling someone a ginger is not necessarily a negative thing, but in the last 5-10 years there has been a growing stigma for people with red hair and freckles. Calling someone a ginger could have negative connotations depending on context. Though most uses of the word "ginger" to teens are used in jest, there's still a shift in the meaning of that word. Being called a redhead is not necessarily the same as being called a ginger.

All descriptors can be labels, but labels have a bit more specificity and background connotations to them, so we’ll focus on those for now.

What does it mean for an author or character to use labels? When an author uses labels in fiction, we see it used in narration, as opposed to if a character used it in dialogue. Both have subtle differences, but both do one thing: they set the reader's expectations. Not necessarily a bad thing, right? After all, sometimes it’s better not to beat around the book (Heh, keeping that typo.) about a character's ethnicity or gender identity or sexuality. Sometimes it's better to come out and say, "I'm Kenyan" or "He's Asian" or she's "Gayer than a fruitcake." It's a quick and easy way to establish a part of your character in the reader's mind.

Besides, sometimes there's no point to ignoring labels. Sometimes instead of saying "She had mocha skin and black hair" try "She's black." After all, how many ways can you describe a person's skin color before it gets dull? No, really, let's find out...

Using labels is often a good way of reclaiming them too. Instead of ignoring a label that most people may not understand, use it. Show them what it really means. For example, when you have a transgender character, it can work well to use labels. Show who your character is, show them that this is a transgendered person, and there's no reason they shouldn't understand this person.

When we have characters using labels in dialogue, we tend to get a lot of reclaiming. I remember one flamingly gay character who often called himself "Queer" or a "fairy" ect, ect. He used derogatory labels to reclaim them, because that was the kind of character he was. How characters use the labels, why they use the labels, even their avoidance to some labels really gives an insight into how the character views himself and those around him.

There's nothing wrong with using labels in dialogue and narrative. Sometimes, by using a label other people avoid, you can make a bold statement with only one word. But this is not always the case. Labels are not always sunshine and joy. To be honest, I don't use labels unless absolutely necessary. In Shell, I only openly mentioned that one of my characters was gay once, and it was only to gauge the reaction of another character to that word. (This was actually edited out during agent revisions.) I find labels very limiting. On the one hand, yes, great, you have an instant picture in the reader's mind. Unfortunately, people's definitions and ideas of labels are always different. I'm going to bet that many who read my point of redhead vs gingers didn't know that ginger could be a negative label. This is partly due to the evolution of language in different areas, slang, and of course, different age/wealth demographics.

In real life and in fiction, sometimes people have a hard time seeing past the label. Introducing a character who is schizophrenic, for example, could change a reader's entire perception on them. For many, schizophrenic is synonymous with crazy. Yes, in one way we can change or "reclaim" the meaning of that word in the reader's mind. But sometimes, I find that authors stray from simply reclaiming a word to making a point about people with schizophrenia or mental health in general. And trying to have a point or moral to the story will definitely turn readers off.

Is labeling necessary? After all, as writers, aren't we taught to show, rather than tell? Isn't telling readers that a character is gay or African or bipolar less effective than showing them? If you can easily show your readers who your character is rather than telling them, that will make for a more enjoyable read.

Can't figure out how to do it? Well, if you have a gay character, show the relationship. Show them with a member of the same sex. Show your readers an ethnic background. Perhaps your MC is Mexican and his mother is traditional? Mental illnesses, I'm half-and-half on. Is it necessary that your MC know that he has this illness? If not, keep the behavior, but drop the label. See if your readers catch that something's amiss. It could lead to interesting discussions of your character's psyche, instead of having readers write off the issues since it’s been “established.”

Whether you're for labels or against them, write how you want to. No editor or agent is going to tell you to add or take out labels unless it's absolutely necessary. Whether you choose to use them or not is dependent on your writing style and the type of story you're telling.

Of course, these are just my thoughts on labels used in everyday life. But what about not-so-nice terms? How would your character facing a derogatory label change your story? How about if your character used the derogatory label?

Leave me your thoughts to devour. Tasty, tasty thoughts.

Peace,

-Katie

I Wanna Hear Yours: How Do You Plan Characters?

So right now I'm in the planning stage for my next WIP. It involves a lot of plotting, a lot of research, and a lot of character development.

For me, characters are probably the best and worst part of writing any story. Without lively and sympathetic characters, a beautifully written plot, world building and conflict has no meaning. If your characters are flat and uninteresting, who's going to want to spend any time getting to know them?

Unfortunately, characters are my worst subject. Developing characters, figuring out who they are, making them likeable... it's always been a challenge for me. And along my writing career I've developed a few tricks that I use whenever I have to start a book.

First, usually, I have to figure out where the character fits into the story. I'll use examples from my current planning stage. Most of them are pretty easy. Charlotte? Simple. She's my main character. Vern? Well, I know he'll end up as my love interest. Gaspar slides into the spot of her sponsor, and we have Aunt Cyn sliding in as a guardian.

Most of the time this is very easy, but every so often I'll get an image of a character, and have no idea how they'll fit into the story, only that they will play some part. Right now, that character for my untitled WIP is Dusty Dayton. Dusty is a very mysterious character. I have no idea how he's going to play out in the story, but I do know that he's necessary. I am a bit of an outliner, but not enough that I can see how his part will play out. So I don't know how he's going to fit in, but it will be interesting to see.

Now, I have my characters (And usually in this part I would name them.) And then I move onto developing them. How do I do this? Simple. Fill out this bad boy:


Name:
Sex:
Birthdate:
Birthplace:
Height:
Age:
Eyes:
Hair:
Ethnic Background:
Nickname:
Religion/Religious Background:
Health/Physical Condition/Disabilities:
Educational Background:
Morals:
Ambitions, Aspirations, Desires:
Major Traits:
Minor Traits:
Character Flaws/Weaknesses:
Character Strengths:
Habitual/Favorite Expressions:
Habitual Mannerisms:
Fears, Anxieties, Hangups:
Frustrations:
Complexes:
Temperament:
Emotions:
Attitude Toward Life:
Attitude Toward Death:.
Leader/Follower/Dropout:
Most Cherished Beliefs/Values:
Worst Habit:
Highest Hope:
Preoccupations, Worries:
Biggest Source Of Pride:
Biggest Source Of Shame Or Defeat:
How They Talk/Speech Patterns (Diction, Tone, Speed, Pitch):
Body Language/Posture:
Gestures:
Perception Of Others:
Reactions To Others:
Involvement With Objects:
Attitude Toward Opposite Sex:
How They Handle Crisis:
Memories, Dreams:
How They Protect Themselves--Fight/Flight/Freeze:
Public Persona:
Daily Habits:
Motivational Patterns/What Gets Them Going:
How They'd Describe Themselves:
Do They See Themselves As Happy/Satisfied?:
Do They See Themselves As A Hero?:
Sense Of Humor:
Feelings Toward Family:
Feelings Toward Friends:
Feelings Toward Enemies:
Philosophy Of Life (In A Phrase):

I LOVE this thing. I wouldn't know where I'd be without it. I didn't create it, I found it on a website, but it helps exponentially. This really helps me get into the characters's heads. I also do a little extra sketch work on the side, like their motivations, add in a bit of internal conflict, and how I think they should change over the course of the book.

It's a long process to go through it, but without it I know my characters come out flat, unchanging, and really unsympathetic.

So you've heard my process, now I wanna hear yours: How do you develop your characters? Do you have a process or do you just see how things go? Maybe your tips can help me find better ways to plan out my characters. ;)

Peace,

-Katie

Abuse in YA

Hello hello out there. Today is the second last day to enter for your chance to win a stunning copy of A TOUCH MORTAL by Leah Clifford. Tell your friends. Tell your friends' friends. There's no reason that you should miss out on this contest.

So, recently I started reading Stolen by Lucy Christopher. (Ignore the side-bar that says I'm reading Chime. I will get back to it. Someday...) Anyway, in it the main character, Gemma, is kidnapped by a man named Ty and brought to Australia. Throughout the book, despite the fact that Ty is a kidnapper, has serious mood-swings, and does some pretty shifty things, I was rooting for him. I loved Ty. He wasn't a villain to me.

So why do I have such a problem with other characters (most usually love interests) who show similar traits?

Let's back up a step here. The problem I want to talk today is abusive/unhealthy relationships sometimes portrayed in YA. It's most noticeable in urban fantasy/paranormal. It's easy to take a character who is humanity-impaired and made him "sexy" and "dangerous." Push it a little further and he (Sorry ladies, most of the time it's the male love interest!) may get her "hurt" and needs to "protect" her.

Our target audience is teenagers 12-17. And let's face it, most of our readers are girls. (Something that needs to be improved, but that's another rant for another day.) Teenage girls, for the most part, love that element of danger. Of mystic. Of intrigue. Danger only adds to the romance. It adds tension and it's hot. Just take a look at the shelves of your YA section. Girls like dangerous bad boys.

But there's an invisible line that I think a lot of authors don't pay attention to.

That line goes from protecting to stalking.

From trying to keep someone safe to isolating them from friends and family.

From sexy and dangerous to mood swings and fights.

Abuse doesn't always take the form of some scary man punching the poor, defenseless girl. It takes other forms, quieter forms that we sometimes miss in real life and in fiction. It takes the form of verbal abuse (Ever heard the one where he insults her to keep her away?) to mental manipulation ("I was just trying to protect you! You know I love you.") to over-protecting, stalking and possessive behaviors. ("I saw you go out with him. What do you think you were doing?!")

I love dark and angsty boys as much as the next person, but in urban fantasy and paranormal it seems easy to call behavior that we would never tolerate in real life "protecting." It's easy when the MC's friends and parents get concerned for the guy to grit his teeth, obviously in turmoil, and say, "I'm dangerous. There are things after me. I was just trying to protect you!"

This is dangerous, because it paints an image of how relationships should be to teens who have little to no experience with relationships. The last thing you want is for girls to think that a guy who mentally manipulates her, calls her stupid, and tries to keep her away from her friends or other boys is the way it "should" be.

Despite all this, I love unhealthy relationships. I love the strange, the different, the twisted. I loved the Marbury Lens and I can direct you to my post all about Cartman from South Park. But the thing about these unhealthy relationships in urban fantasy and paranormal (And other genres, yes, but these are the most prevalent) is that the author portrays these actions as normal. Worse, they portray them as healthy.

I have no problem with unhealthy relationships, but honestly authors, be honest. If you're going to write about an unhealthy relationship, then don't hide it. Be proud of it. The reason I loved Stolen and the relationship between Ty and Gemma is that there was no attempt to hide the fact that it was screwed up and completely unhealthy. If the author, or the characters admit, or however you want to make it apparent, I will stand behind the unhealthy relationship. You could go the traditional route where the guy and girl literally beat each other and I could still support it, so long as you don't try to make it seem right.

Abusive relationships should be explored in YA. Nothing should be off-limits for YA (and if you write it right, nothing is.) But when you lie to your readers and say "This is normal" that is NOT acceptable.

You wouldn't show a girl killing herself because she's obese and portray it as normal, and that anyone fitting these characteristics should kill themselves. So don't do it with abusive relationships.

If you write any genre, you need to take a look at your characters and their actions. You need to think about what aspect of life your characters are portraying. In my book that's currently on sub, the girl stabs the guy she ends up with, but by no means do I portray it as normal. My male character acknowledges that this is screwed up, and he's screwed up for still wanting her after she stabbed him.

There's dark and sexy in YA. Then there's assholes. Then just plain abuse. There's nothing wrong with writing darkness, just please authors, don't try to lie about what you're writing, otherwise, you're as deluded as the victim in your abusive relationships.

Peace,

-Katie

Side Characters are Heroes too.

Thanks everyone who signed up for my easter contest, and hello new followers! :) I hope we can get a few more entries before the end of the week to really spice things up. Retweets are always loved!

Now, in Crash, my current WIP, I have a character that came out of nowhere and quickly weasled his way into a star position. This isn't really unusual for me, as I love side characters and my books tend to write themselves more often than not. But what I'm starting to realize in all my infinite frustration, is that even though he's weasled his way into a star role, right now he's little more than a foil.

I hate foils.

Sure, they're great sometimes, but honestly, in novels, I like to think of each character as their own person. In life we don't have "foils," each person is their own main character, their own star. So I try to make every semi-main character a star, not just my MC.

So how do I do this?

Simple, (although it seems that way even though it took me a while ot puzzle it out.) for a character to stand out, they have to do something on their own. It can be small, it doesn't have to outshine your MC, but have them do something that's still vital to the plot. Of course your side characters all have dreams and motives and desires, so make your characters act on them. They don't have to blindly follow your MC around. It will help expand your story, deepen it, and give interesting subplots. (I love subplots!)

Try it. Find a character who is not insignificant, but has a smaller role but close to your MC. Have them chase their aspirations. Tie it back into the main plot somehow. Maybe they discover something about the villian? Maybe they foil a plan by a rival? Look through the eyes of somebody else to help add to your story. If you're writing in first person, you should be able to pull it off as well. Though we won't see it from the other character's POV, we can have them explain it or show us through other methods.

Peace,

-Katie

Gay Teens in YA and the Media

I've been thinking on this topic a lot and I thought I'd really like to do a blog post on it. I know in America gay teens have a little bit of a harder time coming out and dealing with their sexuality, and there is some tension in some places more than others. I'd love to talk about the bullying issues and suicide rate among gay teens, but unfortunately (or fortunately) I don't have any real experience with that.

I live in Canada, and I grew up with gay kids. I went to school with them, I played matchmaker, I dated girls. And even though I grew up hearing about all these horrible things that happen to gay kids, I never saw any of it. I'm not saying it doesn't exist or that kids in Canada don't struggle with it just as much as the kids in the US, it just wasn't part of my world. But the kids were.

When dealing with coming out, I think the greatest problem (besides our parents, because there is always fear of disapproval from parents, no matter what) was that it was just a "phase" we were going through. As if, even though she was looking at that girl and he was longing after that boy, they'd just wake up the next morning and boom, it'd be gone. And then the humiliation of going up to your friends and having to tell them, "Actually, I'm not gay." Because then comes the stigma that they were a liar, a sheep, trying to get attention. And that stigma was way worse than being gay or straight.

So, as I was in Junior High and surrounded by all these kids who were gay or bi or transgendered and who were trying to figure each other out, I began to ask, where's the drama?

There was drama all right, but no more than any other kind of drama. Kids gossiped, as they always would, and there was hate, just like there was hate for any other kind of relationship. And it just became part of my world. When I first started writing, I wrote gay characters. They were part of my world too.

So you can understand my confusion turning on a TV and opening a book and finding absolutely no hint of gay characters and culture.

And I started to wonder, am I the freak? Why doesn't anyone else hang out with gay people? Where were all the gay people?

The media, especially, is pretty bad for this. In YA, we see more and more gay characters beginning to show up. Some that deal with the quintessential "gay problems" (parents kick you out, bullying, ect.) and some that don't. But frankly, I think we need to see more of this. The hatred for gays in the US and Canada and around the world won't go away if we quietly ignore it. Most hatred for gays is bred in the household, where parents pass their prejudice onto their kids. You can't tear open the household and force people to believe what you believe, and that's not what we're trying to do. But if a kid is told time and time again at home that gays are bad, but when they go outside they read about them in books, see them in tv shows, are exposed to not only gays but the ideas that gays are normal, then that's what's going to make an effort to change people's minds.

You don't have to write about gay problems. Seriously. I'm not kidding. Some kids go up to their parents and say, "You know, I think I'm gay" and their parents accept them at the drop of a hat. No big deal. I'm not saying don't write about gay problems, because they are real and that's a terrible thing, but you're not going to change anyone's mind by talking about the negativity brought by those who don't understand. The way you're going to change people's minds is to paint gays like normal kids. Who don't get beat up just for being who they are. Who don't go home wondering if they'll get kicked out. Who don't want to kill themselves because they think God made them "wrong."

Just write kids.

If you help bring gay characters into the light, even if they're side characters or barely mentioned, then you really help to show kids who are struggling with their sexualities or living in a hostile environment that this is okay. It's normal. Maybe it's not a huge thing, maybe you're not changing the world overnight, but it's the small things that matter.

Peace,

-Katie

Happy Moments

Besides some things in my non-write life that I'm stoked about (OMG! Job interview in like... an hour. SQUEE!) not much has been happening. Which lets me focus on working (note: fighting ) with my WIP. Today I finished another chapter ( 33K in and still rollin') and when I got to the end of the chapter, I placed in a high moment for my characters, which is my FAVORITE kind of writing.

I know. WTF? I don't write comedy. I don't write happy go lucky stuff. If you've been following my blog, you'll know I'm an optimist with a fascination with war, famine, death, racism, sexism, and the like. And I incorporate them all into my novels. I like dark stuff. I love conflict.

But it's because of that love of conflict that writing high moments is so wonderful.

I'm going to backpedal on the terminology here. Partly because my lingo may or may not be made up by yours truly.

A "high moment" in a novel is when your character (usually your POV character) is at a moment of extreme joy. They've gotten the girl! They've won the game! They didn't die fighting the giant sand worm! It's a moment when your characters are happy, despite the shit you've hurled at them left and right.

A "low moment" in contrast is... you guessed it, just the opposite. When your characters are beaten down, depressed, angry, just not around a happy camper.

I throw a lot of crap on my characters during the events of my novels, so naturally, they spend a lot of time down in the dumps. But in my writing I've found it's absolutely important to include high moments. Where your characters crack jokes and just enjoy themselves for once. They don't have to be long. The one I just wrote was about two paragraphs long, and it was two characters who had just survived a car crash. One cracked a joke and then they couldn't stop laughing. It was a high moment for them. They were happy to be alive. They found anything funny because they were so relieved that they made it.

High moments can be silly. They can be funny. They can just be ridiculous. A high moment in another novel I wrote included the characters beating each other with wet clothing.

I think I need to stress this now, however: High moments are for your characters, not for your readers.

I'm not making sense? Well, that's because I never make sense. Observe:

“Morning Seth,” Arthur said, breaking off his conversation with Dahlia and climbing to his feet. He looked stupidly bright for so early. Damn morning people. “How’d you sleep?”

“Coffee.” Seth pulled open the cupboards and began to shift through them.

“Did you want breakfast?” Arthur asked.

Seth leveled his stare on him. “Coffee.”

“We made tea, if you’d like,” Dahlia said.

“Coffee!”

This is a scene from my novel. Is this a high point? No. Will the readers be amused? Of course. This is purely for reader benefit to add a little lightness to the scene so the reader isn't dragged down with the darkness of a lot of what happens in the novel.

This is opposed to:

“If it wasn’t for you, I’d be some sort of… of toy to that thing back there. You’ve saved me from a fate worse than death.”

A wicked glint shone in Molly’s eyes. “I said thank me, not go full on chick-flick.”

The joke was lame, but it succeeded in pulling a smile from Arthur. The joy was addicting and it soon spread into laughter. Arthur couldn’t say whether it was the elation of escaping the crash, of being alive, or the need to distract themselves from the heartache ahead, but soon he and Molly were laughing until tears rolled down their faces.

This isn't as amusing to the reader. They may not find Molly's bad joke that funny, but that's okay. They don't have to. What this scene is supposed to do is not only lighten the darkness a bit, but also instill a sense of fondness in the reader. If you've done your job as a writer and your characters are sympathetic, then this should instill them with a caring for the characters. You feel more likened to them. It's bittersweet, because the reader knows that they're not going to be happy anytime soon, but you feel glad that they could have a few moments of happiness before things go to hell.

High moments should be spaced throughout the novel. Right after a mildly tragic event is good, but if you really want to hit the reader where it hurts, put it before a major tragedy. In another novel I have a scene where two characters are arguing about swear words (makes sense in context, I promise) right before one of them dies. It's amusing on the first read through, but on the second it's sad, because you know this is the last time they'll have fun together.

Even if you're not writing YA, these high moments are important. Because your characters are people. They have happy moments and sad moments and they're going to try to make the best out of their situation. They help create reader sympathy. If your characters are dorky and are messing around, they're going to connect well with your dorky readers.

Find dark spots in your manuscript. Are they heavy dark spots? Place a happy moment beforehand. Are they just bumps in the road for your character? Try it afterwards. Read it all together and see what works and what doesn't. Experiment, because writing is hands-on learning. Your characters, and your readers, deserve a pick-me-up every once in a while.

Peace,

-Katie

The Not-So-Nice Guys

I'm fighting with my WIP at the moment, so we're taking a break. At the present moment, I'm watching South Park and making one of my lovely dollies.

Anyone who knows me, knows I LOVE LOVE LOVE South Park. I could talk for hours about what I love about this show, but let's save that for another day, shall we?

Instead, we're going to talk about Eric Cartman. I linked to his wiki page there for a couple of reasons. 1) if you feel like actually delving into his character, I'm never against that. 2) More importantly, scroll half way down the page. Cartman has a section labeled "Criminal record." Because of how long it is, I'm going to do just a brief summary:

--> Murder
--> Vandalism
--> Manslaughter
--> Murder by proxy
--> Attempted Murder
--> Attempted Genocide
--> Assault
--> Smuggling
--> Theft/Obstruction of Criminal Investigation
--> Violation of firearm laws/threatening with a deadly weapon
--> Arson
--> Hate Crimes
--> Kidnapping and False Imprisonment
--> Terrorism
--> War Crimes
--> Piracy
--> Breaking and Entering
--> Hit and Run
--> Blackmailing/Framing/False Evidence
--> Torture
--> Fraud/Plagiarism
--> Rape
--> Forceful confinement
--> Vigilantism.


Jesus. You know, I was only going to list a few, but I figured I might as well throw it all up there. Granted, he's had fourteen years on the air to build up his criminal record, but considering he's only nine years old, it's still pretty impressive.

Now, I hear a lot of new writers worry about writing bad characters. Characters that may be villains in a different book. And honestly, half the time they couldn't compare to the stuff Cartman's done. And yet South Park is still on the air, a large part of that is thanks to Cartman.

South Park has characters like Kyle or Stan that viewers can sympathize with. Cartman, however, appeals to our darker side. We want to watch what Cartman will do next. More so, we want to know why he does what he does, which is why episodes like Tsst and Fishsticks do so well. They delve into Cartman's psyche and reveals that he doesn't do this because he doesn't have a conscience, he does it because he thinks he's doing the right thing.

I want to see more characters like Cartman. I want to see the darker side treaded on, especially in young adult. Teens are exposed to things like drugs, violence, sex, gangs, abuse, self-mutilation, suicide, ect. Teens aren't babies. They've been exposed to the darker side of life and it's fascinating.

So write more dark characters, but if you're going to do it, then delve into the why. That's what makes villains and anti-heroes so amazing. The why. Are they like Cartman, who believes he's doing the right thing? Is she aware that she's walking a fine line between insanity and the norm but is tempted anyway? Does he lack the ability to understand the difference between right and wrong? Does she lack empathy?

Murderers, rapists, deranged psychos, they were all teenagers once. Delve into their heads, find out what makes them tick. Don't just get into the darkness that they create, but the darkness within. Throw controversies and the fear of stepping on people's toes aside. Write dark characters who are honest and true and you will create something special. And even if we don’t sympathize with the character, we’ll be fascinated by them and drawn deeper into the story to see just how it’ll come to an end.

Peace,

-Katie

Birthdays

So, my birthday's coming up. On the 20th, I'll be turning 19. I feel way older than I am. (Probably because I hang out with so many writers who are usually much older than me. Then again, my mother always said I acted 30 when I was 10, so you never know.)

But, all this thinking about birthdates made me wonder if characters deserve birthdays. If you don't plan on throwing them a party, what's the point?

I'm going to wave my "characters are people too" flag here. Because I suck at writing characters. I'm 100% a plot writer. Some of my earlier books, my MCs were cardboard cutouts. (Yet my side characters were fully fleshed out. I think I may need a psychological analysis.) But after a few trial and error books, I realized characters were never going to just "come to me" like my plots did. I had to work on them.

So what do I do? I create the most extensive character interview sheet out there. (If there's one that's more extensive, I don't want to see it. Mine's three pages long.)

I hate starting a new book because it means I have to run my MCs through my interview process. While very helpful, it's also time consuming and incredibly boring. But birthdays are on there! Because I feel it really helps get a grip on who that character is. Especially in an urban setting.

Just think back to elementary/junior high/middle school. Kids in the same classes are all about the same age, so when you're that age, you use the dates of birth to determine who's older than each other. (There was a girl who was born on Feb 4 in my junior high, and because she was born 16 days before me, she was definitely the "older kid." It traumatized me, since being born in february, I was used to being "older" than all the other kids.)

Why should this matter? Because depending on where your character was born in the year, it's going to determine how the other kids in their class see him/her, and how s/he views them.

For example. A friend of mine who was born on Dec 23 was always seen as younger than everyone else. Because when she was turning fourteen, everyone else was turning fifteen. That can frustrate a kid. (Especially when you just turned 17 and all your friends just turned 18 and you can't go to the bars with them for another year.)

In the long run of your urban fantasy, is it really going to matter? Probably not. But I like to think if you're ever in a situation where a reader, or a critic, is asking you questions, those small details show you've really thought about your book, and you know what you're talking about.

Peace,

-Katie

Mm... liquid courage.

Hello everyone out there in internet land. As you sit reading this post, where are you?

If you're like me, it is one o'clock, you just got out of your classes, and am now sitting in a corner of the bar trying to make eyecontact with strangers.

Yes, I am that creepy person sitting alone in the bar that you avoid at all costs. Why am I drinking at one in the afternoon? Because I suck at making friends.

This may come off as a slightly skewed reason for drinking in the middle of the day. Well, being the little writer that I am, I spend most of my time hiding in my room pounding out characters and struggling to create some semblance of reality with my words. So, naturally, I'm socially inept. When people try to talk to me, sometimes I sit there and stare with mouth agape. (This also happens when I'm talking on forums, it's just nobody can see it.)

My mother is very concerened about this, being the social butterfly that she is, so she tries to get me to do things she thinks will help me meet people.

Hence the bar in the middle of the day.

Why am I indulging her? Because I am a sad, lonely kid looking for someone to spend my afternoons with. And as I'm sitting here, burying myself in my laptop and trying to work up the courage to talk to the guys by the pool table, I can't help but wonder how I can sit here, being the chicken shit that I am, and yet most of my characters are rash, rude, and often don't hesitate to speak their mind.

How can I write a character that is utterly confident in him/herself if I myself am not confident enough to talk to inhebriated individuals at my university's pub? How am I able to convey swave and sophisticated when most of the time I feel like a bumbling moron?

I realize that most of writing has to do with imagination and immitating reality. I mean, I can write about magic without ever seeing someone shoot a lightning bolt from their hands. What's so different about writing a confident character when I'm sitting in the corner nursing my smirnoff? I actually think there's a huge differnece.

Expelcially for young adult writers, there is a huge emphasis on character. Teens like people we can relate to. (Adults too, so I'm not leaving out other writers.) So you can make up how magic works, even if you've never sat and saw someone preform a spell. But when it comes to characters, you need to really experience different things to propperly articulate what you mean.

For example, if you're a realatively outgoing person, and you're writing a character that is anything but, than go to a public place (doesn't have to be a bar) and take a seat in the corner. Don't talk to anyone. Just sit and observe, and think how someone might react who was too afraid to get up and be themselves. Think about what they might look at, how they might sit, how they would reason with themselves why they shouldn't get up and talk to that cute girl/boy and why it's so much better if she/he sat there and studied for their history test.

And as a realtively reserved person myself, I need to hurl myself into situations that I might find uncomfortable (like talking to strangers) to get a real grip on how a character with confidence in themselves might act or feel in that situation.

Doesn't mean a few drinks beforehand won't help.

Now, I'm going to chug down the last of my smirnoff and head over to the pool tables to see if I can strike up a conversation with a real human being.

Peace,

-Katie