I'm my current WIP, I'm working on the section where I introduce the foil for the hero. A foil is a person who contrasts with and so emphasizes the characteristics of another. Trouble is, in the heroine's mind, she thinks they are the same (even down to the same cologne). So my challenge is to present the foil in such a light that she can see the difference, but only after perhaps being swayed in his direction.
I don't think that all characters have to have foils. Like a quiet, introspective heroine doesn't necessarily have to have a perky, loud friend. But in "coming of age" women's fiction, I find that they are very frequently used. Somehow, the heroine comes to her self-actualization through her interaction with the foil. Either the foil has faith and she doesn't, or the foil went through a similar experience and handled it completely differently than the heroine...something like that.
Perhaps one of the greatest examples of literary foils I can think of is in Austen's Sense and Sensibility. Marianne and Elinor Dashwood are so dissimilar in their dispositions and interests, yet joined by sisterhood. Austen did it also in Pride and Prejudice with Elizabeth Bennett and her older sister, Jane. Where Elizabeth is hot-headed and outspoken, Jane was always demure and proper, one was dark-headed, the other light, etc.
Wonder what it is we like - and maybe even crave - about this idea of antitheses uniting together in literary work? Contrasts make for so much more fodder than similarities. I'm looking forward to portraying my foil in my WIP...and eventually making my hero shine in juxtaposition.
Just random thoughts for today...
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Foils
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 7:02 PM 1 comments
Labels: foils
Friday, February 27, 2009
Late Nights
I've been spending several late nights in a row working on my WIP...and of course, feeling the effects throughout the next day. But it's the only time I have to really work on my book, since the baby is asleep starting around 8 or 8:30. So usually I can get in about 3 good hours, but just pay for it later.
I'm asking myself if its worth it. If I'm so tired, will what I'm producing be better than what I would produce when well-rested? But then when would I find the time to write if I actually am well-rested? See the quandary? And this isn't even counting doing crits for other people and correcting crits I receive.
Yikes. But I can't stop at night when I'm writing a killer scene (at least, I think so). I have to finish it, or I'd not sleep well the few remaining hours that I have. I'd just toss and turn about what I could have written.
So for now, I'm going to adjust to less sleep, more writing time. I think it's worth it in the end for my psychological health.
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 10:49 AM 1 comments
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Mary Connealy Crit
I put the opening couple of lines from my current WIP on the blog, So You Want To Be Published, where guest blogger Mary Connealy was giving some tips on the writing craft. She asked for some openings, so I sent mine. She responded and said it was pretty strong, and that she was interested in reading more. She gave me some ideas about going into a deep POV. You can find the post here.
Gotta love free crits from published authors. :)
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 8:06 PM 0 comments
Labels: deep POV, Mary Connealy, WIP
Affirmation
Who doesn't need affirmation? Gary Chapman wrote a book called The Five Love Languages (excellent therapeutic resource, as well as just a great read for the general population) in which "words of affirmation" made the cut. My actual love language is quality time, but I do so like the affirming word. I think it's secondary, maybe.
Recently, though, I've received quite a bit of affirmation on my current WIP. Some of this confirmation came from people I'm very close to and have known for a while. Others came from people I've never met, but have an association with through American Christian Fiction Writers. Either way, it just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside! I sit here, reading comments from my crit partners with a goofy grin on my face. I think, "Hey! She got it!" or "Aww, she likes my main man as much as I do!" Sigh.
I suppose I should begin writing these peoples' names down, as hopefully they will end up on a dedication page somewhere in the future.
To all my affirmers, and you know who you are, a multitude of thanks. It means the world to me.
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 12:04 AM 0 comments
Labels: affirmation, love languages
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Tom Swifties
I've learned something from one of my crit partners that I had absolutely never heard of before, but makes total sense. Tom Swifties. To quote the Random House Dictionary:
Tom Swiftie, a play on words that follows an unvarying pattern and relies for its humor on a punning relationship between the way an adverb describes a speaker and at the same time refers significantly to the import of the speaker's statement, as in: "I know who turned off the lights," Tom hinted darkly.
Not that I was intentionally trying to make a play on words with my speech tags in my novel. I thought I would broadening the description of what was being said. But in truth, my writing was strong enough without it. Almost every single time, the -ly adverb was completely unneeded.
But not only did I do this in speech tags, I did it EVERYWHERE. Just -ly adverbs all over the place, serving no purpose but to clog up the writing.
My favorite examples from my own writing (Katie, you should love this!):
Anna laughed loudly, this time causing others to look our way. "Loudly" isn't needed at all.
His brow furrowed slightly. As opposed to furrowed fully?
"Must be a story behind a declaration like that," Anna said conversationally. How does one converse conversationally? I laughed hard at this one. This might actually fit the definition of a Tom Swiftie.
She sat down quickly, her cheeks flushing gently. Joshua tried unsuccessfully to hide his grin before turning around. A gentle flush. I was trying to go for a flush that wasn't beet red all over..just a tinge on the cheeks. Why didn't I just write that instead? She sat down in a rush, a pink tinge on her cheeks. (I just went back and changed that, by the way.)
So I'm going to work on tightening up my prose and dialogue. I'm really pleased with my first 15 pages of this story I'm going to turn in on for the Genesis competition now. No less than seven people have edited/critiqued it and I feel that it's in good shape now.
So thanks to all who had a part in this! I'm not going to say that I've written the last Tom Swifty that I ever will, but they will less prominent from here on out.
Who knew?
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 9:46 PM 1 comments
Labels: adverbs, tightening sentences, Tom Swifties, Tom Swifty
Saturday, February 21, 2009
The Elusive Ellipses
Since I write quite a bit of my books from the first person POV, I often like to indicate a pause or uncertainty in my heroine's thoughts or words. And to do this, I've been using an ellipsis. The little dot-dot-dots that also find themselves in my own emails rather frequently, as I write emails in a stream of consciousness.
According to Grammar Girl, "A number of style guides note that ellipses can be used to indicate a pause or falter in dialog, the passage of time, an unfinished list, or that a speaker has trailed off in the middle of a sentence or left something unsaid. For example, The Chicago Manual of Style states, “Ellipsis points suggest faltering or fragmented speech accompanied by confusion, insecurity, distress, or uncertainty.” The manual contrasts ellipses and dashes, which it states should be reserved for more confident and decisive pauses.
She goes on to say that ellipses are used much too frequently, and that normal punctuation should apply most of the time. (I was hoping for a percentage...like you shouldn't use passive voice more than around 10% of the time.)
So, on to how to format an ellipsis. Grammar Girl specifies that you have only three dots, with spaces between the dots and spaces before and after the first and last dots. But she says this is only when omitting words. So what about when the speaker or thinker just loses his train of thought? Or is unsure?
I don't know! I've been doing it like this . . . and then going on with the rest of the thought. Or course, most word processing programs make automatic spaces between three consecutively typed periods. But I had a crit member say that that only was used to represent omitted words. When I researched ellipses, I found this website, and the ellipses are definitely spaced out further than "average."
I'm going to stick with whatever the Chicago Manual of Style says, once I figure out what that is. The CMS Online costs $30/year to subscribe to. And to buy the book from Amazon it's $34.65 and comes with free shipping....what to do?
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 10:34 AM 3 comments
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Crit Groups
I'm in a crit group through ACFW comprised of 5 other individuals and myself. I'm having to edit between 50-60 pages every other week and around 30-40 pages every other week (on the week I submit). And I'm finding that this takes away from the precious little time I have to work on my own stuff! I feel obligated to edit and crit the other's work, of course. I also want to participate in the spirit of the crit group, as well as get an idea of what it's like to write/edit for a deadline, which is good practice. But in my writer's dreamlife, I'd have all this TIME to write and edit my own stuff and edit everyone else's. It's just not happening! Swamped doesn't begin to describe my thoughts. But I know crit groups are the way to go...so I'll plunge ahead and hope the schedule starts to sink in and become more routine.
On top of that, my new friend and fellow-writer, Katie Ganshert, and I will be swapping material soon to edit each other's work, as we have a lot in common in life - we figure this will transfer to the written page, as well. But we've already decided to be a bit more lax in our time requirements, as she also is in an ACFW crit group. Aren't we two peas in a pod, Katie? =)
Posted by Jeannie Campbell, LMFT at 11:36 PM 1 comments
Labels: critique groups, editing, Katie Ganshert
