About the Process

I'm not sure how many of you are out there--those like me who are dedicated to the people in their head. Before the rest of you deign to call someone to put people like me in white jackets, think about the authors you like to read. Better yet, think about the good authors you like to read. For some it takes months, sometimes years to come up with the dynamic, engrossing stories that they tell. A writer's dedication to the people in her head brings you protagonists you love and sometimes want to yell at for being so phenomenally stupid. It brings you the antagonists you: wish weren't so clever; and love frighteningly enough.

This brings me to my rant of the day.

There are certain writers whom I've read enough of to know that they are possibly at the end of their creative rope. There is a point at which you become hyper aware of the same devices and descriptions. I know that we all hope for happy endings and I know that there are some genres that only write happy endings. It's not to say that there's anything wrong with those genres. There is something wrong with the writers. I think even with a genre such as romance where most people expect a happy ending, the author should be challenged to keep some of the mystery alive. I shouldn't be able to guess midway through the book how the happy ending is going to unfold. (Yes, I'm looking at you Nora.)

Another thing I have problems with are cookie cutter characters. We have the ingenue, young and plucky. There is the quiet, demure shy girl and then there's the amazon who just kicks ass when she needs to and moves on. There is nothing inherently wrong with these archetypes. Every character is an archetype to some degree, but the best authors are the ones who add so much depth to a character that we forget. Many of the problems I see in writing have to do with the characters of whom we are only shown photos. It seems like going to a dating site and seeing photos of a guy and having someone tell you, "Isn't this guy great? You should marry him!"
Are we expected to fall in love with characters when we've only seen a photograph? Of course not. It's not enough to see what type of character you have, but how the character came to be that way.

In addition to the mistakes listed above that even seasoned writers make, I'd like to add something that most beginning (and sometimes seasoned) writers miss. (Nora, you are indeed overly seasoned. Have a rest.) No one likes a perfect character. NO ONE. They get on our nerves and oftentimes piss us off. As human beings we're not perfect and we don't want the characters we read about to be either. Could a character have something backfire? Let it happen. Is there a way the character can struggle with him or herself? Let them. Have a character agonize over an action that has to be taken even though it may hurt someone they love dearly. If a character can breeze through life and not have to bat an eye at what he or she does, then there's no point in telling the story.

The last think I would like to add is avoid things that make (obviously support) characters annoying. The chief problem I've seen are stereotypes. Please no stereotypes. I don't want to see the Black street thug with an absent father, the Asian nerd or a Hispanic roughneck. I don't want to see the oversexed Black or Latina woman and I don't want to see the docile Asian woman either. Don't write a minority character just so they can be used for fodder later. If screenplay writers had L.L.'s character live to the end of the movie Deep Blue Sea you can write a minority character that will live to see the end of your story too.

In contrast, if you want to find out what you should do, read good authors. A good author can make you laugh out loud, make you cry and make you think. Authors I recommend are: Ray Bradbury, Arthur C. Clark, and Lynn Flewelling.