Most of you will probably already have seen Rachel Aaron’s post “How I Went From Writing 2,000 Words a Day to 10,000 Words a Day”; if you haven’t, I recommend checking it out, because what she says is spot-on.

I’m a big believer in “as long as the job gets done”; fast writer, slow writer, pantser, outliner, scheduler, slacker. There is no right way to write.

That said, if you want to try writing faster to see if that works for you, I’d definitely give her method a try.

I do have a tiny addition of my own. See, for the most part, I subconsciously used Rachel’s exact approach during my first NaNoWriMo, leading to my famous (ahem) five-day win/ten-day novel/the book that got me my agent. I had lots of time available, I got super excited, and I planned like the wind.

The one thing I did differently was that I didn’t plan everything at the start of the day, necessarily. I never wrote for several hours straight. I’d write for one hour, using NaNo chatroom word wars (but Twitter or Gchat would work just as well), then spend the next hour doing chores around the house, tinkering with the scene I’d just written, and think about my next scene in-depth.

During the one-hour word wars, I’d write about 2000-3000 words. During the hours in-between, I’d write maybe 200 words, but mostly I was hashing out the details and fueling the enthusiasm for my next scene. And for me, it worked. In future revision rounds, I added major subplots, cut scenes, took out over thirty thousand words, changed the book to YA, but the overall structure of the book remained pretty much identical to that first draft.

I love writing fast. I’ve never been able to match my FAE PRINT speeds, sticking to 2000-6000 words a day, but there’s nothing like being so caught up in your story that you don’t even have the time to start doubting yourself. Writing begets writing. You get caught up in this whirl-wind of creation and by the time insecurities should be creeping in you’ve long passed The End and it’s time to take a step back and plot out edits. All of a sudden, in the time it might normally take to finish a video game (at a normal-ish pace) or work your way through a TV series, you’ve added another novel to your name and you get to show your CPs something shiny.

Yeah, I’m totally in the mood to write another novel now. Hah! Rachel’s post reminded me that I really need to try another two-week novel sometime.

There’s one particular trick in that post I look forward to using: spicing up even the less interesting scenes to make them exciting. Of course you try to avoid boring scenes at all costs, but I’ve rarely actually sat down to brainstorm ways to rack up the tension on a scene-by-scene basis.

And man, do I look forward to giving that a try now.

I’m knee-deep in messy, messy edits right now, but I figure y’all don’t want to hear about that.

Instead, I was curious to hear what you guys thought about the plot device of side characters withholding information from the narrator. I’ve been on a reading binge this past month, and that situation came up more than once, and it bothered me a lot more than I expected.

Not always, of course. When done right, there’s a lot of narrative tension in a situation like this. People around your character have information they’re trying to find out — heck, that happens in almost

No, when it bothers me is when I can't figure out why those people are being so secretive. I need to know and understand their motives. Otherwise this just seems like a cheap plot device. Sometimes it’s easy: They’re the villain! Other times, it’s never explained in the book and no reason I can come up with fits.

Another common trope is when the character is ostensibly on the main character’s side, but they’re being weirdly cryptic — and sometimes the MC won’t even press further! If the person sitting across from you has information that could save people’s lives, it’s really not the time for politeness. And again, explain why the character is so cryptic.

Basically, your character needs to be asking the same questions the reader is. And if they’re not getting answers? There had better be a good reason for it. Otherwise, the tension feels fake.

Am I the only one bothered by this plot device? Do share!

I’d post a bigger update, but it’s a couple of minutes until midnight and I’m still over 600 words away from reaching today’s word count goal.

Here’s my current count:

17330 / 75000 words. 23% done!

One thing I’m realizing is that writing quickly is a lot easier when you’re completely immersed in the book at all hours of the day. Right now, I’m not — I allow myself to watch TV, play the occasional game, socialize, read books.

Not much of the above, mind you, but enough.

On one hand, I think it’s a good thing: It keeps you from getting worn out, it keeps you in touch with the rest of the world, it keeps you healthy. Having less time available also makes it easier to allocate the hours you can dedicate to writing to, er, writing.

On the other hand, I find that it’s making me run into a lot more mental blocks when it comes to the actual getting-words-on-paper part. When I wrote books without (most of) the above distractions, I’d spend every waking minute thinking about the book. About the current scene, about the next scene, about how this plot thread would work out. It meant that when I actually sat down at the computer, I knew exactly what to write.

Now, I find myself going, “Er… what happens next?”

For example, I know my main character has to do X in location Y next, but I don’t have the faintest idea of what location Y looks like, nor have I really considered how the transition between the current scene and that one. So while I had no problem getting through the first 1300 words of my 2000-a-day goal and was very optimistic about hitting the rest early, I screeched to a halt when I realized how clueless I was about the next scene. I know what happens and why it’s necessary for the plot — both of these things are in my outline — but all those tiny details, the exact course of events…

I should’ve brainstormed those in the shower. Or during groceries. Or instead of watching My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic just now. (Tiny ponies! They are the cutest!)

Otherwise, it’s too easy to write, come to a halt, and get distracted again. It pulls you out of the flow.

I think I’m slowly — sloooowly — getting a hang of my process. Given that this is my fifth book, it’s about time, right?

Now, while I’m off to actually go and apply this knowledge, here’s a track from this book’s soundtrack — Weak, by Skunk Anansie:

That may be the worst subject on this blog yet. You’re welcome.

So the other day Failure to Launch was on TV. As you might expect, it’s not a particularly good film. I have nothing against romantic comedies per se, but I tend to dislike contrived situations, characters failing to communicate, predictable humor… basically the very things most romantic comedies hinge on.

However horrific a film or book, though, there’s usually something to be learned. (Even if it’s about what to avoid.) In this case, there were some subtle characterization bits that I liked.

(Spoilers ahead!)

Basically, the lead woman is someone who is hired to motivate men to move out, usually by their parents. That’s what the whole plot hinges on: Sarah Jessica Parker needs to get 35-year-old Matthew McConaughey out of the house. His mother still does his laundry, cleans, and cooks luxurious meals.

At this point, the audience is thinking two things. One: No wonder the dude sticks around. Two: If his mother wants him out of the house, shouldn’t she stop doing those things before she starts hiring complete strangers?

Both these things are handled surprisingly well later on in the film. As it turns out, the reason that he’s still living at home is that his fiancée died a few years ago, and he’s struggled to adjust. When he later finds out that his new girlfriend was hired by his parents, he’s genuinely hurt. He tells his parents that they could’ve just asked him to move out. They never did.

Good point. However much of a lazy slob the guy is, both these things create some amount of sympathy for someone we could only roll our eyes at in the beginning.

Other motivations are also cleared up: his parents never asked him to move out because they didn’t want to pressure him after his fiancée’s death. His mother never even wanted him to move out: she’s worried what life alone with her husband would be like. It’s much easier to have a son around as a buffer.

As another example, in one scene, Sarah Jessica Parker is meeting a different client at a small café. He’s your stereotypical nerd, short and chubby and into Star Wars, presumably living in his mother’s basement. She’s talking about what a wonderful guy he is, smart and imaginative, all those good things, and he excuses himself to go to the bathroom. He says, “Please don’t leave.”

Again – instant sympathy for a character who only shows up in a single scene. The audience can’t help but wonder how many women did just up and walk off.

None of these things are particularly deep or well-handled… but it does work. With only a few lines – sometimes only a few words – you have a full understanding of someone’s situation and motivations.

As someone who has a tendency to let her characters divulge backstory and motivations over pages and pages, I could probably take a few lessons from that.*

* This is hugely embarrassing. Did I mention yet that it’s a really bad film? Yeah? Okay then.

As most of you know, I’ve been doing krav maga for a few years now. What I like about this martial art versus many others is its focus on effectiveness and versatility. Most of the times, krav maga techniques can be used by people of whatever age and body type. Given that I’m very much on the slim side, this is useful for me. There’s no real point in learning intricate wrestling techniques when people I’m busy choking can just get up and walk off with a bounce in their step.

Which has happened. Ahem. Moving on.

So anyway, one of the techniques we’re learning in preparation for the orange belt exams (exciting!) is how to defend yourself when you’re shoved against a wall and choked from behind.

(This is how I spend my Sunday mornings, people. It’s inhuman.)

Here’s what you have to do in a situation like that: you lift one arm up high, while your other arm reaches for your knee. Since that shoulder is now lowered, you have the opportunity to turn enough to smash your opponent in the face with the elbow of the arm you lifted up.

Well, you have that opportunity when you’re over 100lbs. Cue me standing up against the wall and trying – and failing – with all my might to turn around.

I went to the instructor for help, and after convincing him with some demonstrations that, yes, I really was that pathetic, he gave a very simple tip: kick the jerk. Just reach back and slam my heel into his foot/shin. That’d jolt him enough that I could get loose and turn around.

The dude was right. It worked like a charm – up until yesterday, at least, when I reached back and slammed my heel into the floor. The guy stood too far away from me to do anything. I did the next logical thing: I let my leg snap up and slammed my heel into his groin.

Is this in the official guidebook? Nope. Will it get me through my belt exams? You bet. Because the end goal of krav maga is not to learn all the techniques to a T, it’s to get out of a situation alive and – ideally – in one piece. If you need to adapt those techniques to work for you, so be it. For the same reason, when we were going over ground-fighting techniques after, I focused on all the nasty tricks instead of the main chokes and holds. A lot of those require pure strength: I don’t have that. I do have reflexes and flexibility. I adapt accordingly.

The same applies to writing. The end goal is not to write 50,000 words in a month. The end goal is not to have one editing round to focus on plot, and one editing round to focus on characters, and one to focus on line edits. The end goal is not to learn to edit as you write, or to lock up your inner editor, or to write an even 1000 words per day or an entire book in a week, or to ignore TV while you draft.

I say, watch all the TV in the world. Write as fast or as slow as you want. Forget about everyone else’s writing rules, because the end goal is to write a damned book.

Advice can be helpful sometimes, but in the end, you’re the only one who gets to decide how you write. If it works, it works.

Another contest to win Across the Universe, this time on Beth Revis’s own blog!

I absolutely adored Jennifer Walkup’s write-up of Show vs. Tell; it’s one of the best I’ve seen, with wonderful examples and explanations of why said examples do and don’t work. Even if you know all about showing versus telling, it’s great to have the occasional reminder.

Adam Heine discusses The Problem With The Gun On The Mantle; how to avoid predictability without making something come out of left field completely?

Putting on my feminist hat for a few moments… kattahj on LJ talks about owning books by male authors vs. female authors, and how the results are often surprising.

Have you seen the Female Character Flowchart? As much as I love the idea of it, I’m not fond of the execution. A few wonderful rebuttals can be found here, here and here. Like elle_white over at LJ says: “Can we please stop putting down female characters in the name of feminism?”

The comments are also very much worth reading.

I always enjoy the Feminists With Disabilities/Forward blog; their latest post, however, I enjoyed from a writing standpoint, as well. In discussing a letter sent to the Ask Amy column, s.e. smith says the following:

Many people seem to believe that there is a specific ‘right’ way to study and that if you don’t study that way, you’re doing it wrong. Staying up all night to study is wrong, even if your sleep schedule is actually better suited to studying at night. Studying with music on is wrong. Moving while studying is wrong. There’s a whole long list of things touted as ‘good study habits,’ like ‘don’t leave your work until the end of the weekend.’

To me, what makes a good study habit is what works for a given student.

I almost feel lazy by relating this to writing. It’s just too easy. Ha! Anyway, to avoid repeating my rant from a few months ago, I’ll just say: CO-SIGNED.

Beth Revis reminded me on Twitter of my love for Dropbox. Basically, this program creates a folder on every computer you download it to, linked by your account. Every change you make to this folder – adding or deleting files, editing them, whatever – is uploaded to the Dropbox server, which subsequently updates all other folders on all your other computer. As a writer, this is marvelous; I no longer have to lug around USB drives or mail files to myself. I simply keep the file I’m working on in the Dropbox folder. The moment I press ‘Save’ it’s automatically uploaded (immediate back-up!); the moment I start up a different computer, the file automatically updates to the newest version.

Dropbox also has a ‘Public’ folder; everything you drag in there gets a URL of its own to link other people to. Which means no more manual uploading to Photobucket or needing to get people’s e-mail addresses to mail them a photo. You just move the file and send them the link.

I know I’m sounding like some dorky commercial, but it really is lovely. And free. And well, I’m Dutch. I’m a fan of free.

Since I’m one of those people who needs to be rewarded for her progress, I also really dig word meters like this one:

56400 / 75000 words. 75% done!

I get to feel good about seeing the percentage climb up, and it gives me something tangible to do after I complete a few words.

I mean, there’s Twitter. But I guess people might not always be interested in being updated on your word count every few minutes. Whatever.

And yeah, I’m a notebook kinda girl. I’m a really fast typist (119 WPM according to a test I did the other day), so needing to write a novel longhand would kill me… but somehow plotting long-hand really works for me. I think it’s a combination of factors: being slowed down gives my mind the chance to wander into different directions, which helps in coming up with plot solutions; I don’t get the chance to delete what I’ve already written, which means I can read my old thoughts for inspiration later – I’ve reused more than a few discarded plot ideas this way; and it’s small, meaning I can take it anywhere and write whenever ideas strike. (Pages with wiggly handwriting often mean I was in the bus at the time, or just woke up and took the notebook from my nightstand.) It’s good to get away from the computer every now and again.

Various websites are also really useful – QueryTracker.com most of all. I could seriously fill a whole month’s worth of posts on how amazing this site is for querying writers, but there’s no point. Use it, love it, have its babies. K?

As you might’ve gathered from previous posts, I love creating soundtracks for my books because they really help me get into the mood of the book. When drafting or editing, I rarely listen to anything but the soundtrack. It spurs on ideas, stops me from getting too distracted, all that good stuff.

One warning, though: it can have adverse effects. Remember this? Yeah. The morning previous, I listened to the Heirs soundtrack. I cast 100% of the blame on that.

Most importantly: WORD RACES. During August, I grabbed lovely folk like Jodi Meadows, Beth Revis, Christine Nguyen, Authoress Anonymous, and Helen Corcoran on GChat and doing word races with them: we share our word counts, focus on writing for a good half hour, then compare word counts again. It’s incredibly effective, and has helped me get a lot done in a very short amount of time – even on days when I’d already given up on productivity.

---

I’m currently on vacation, so may take a while to read your comments – this post was written and scheduled beforehand. 

Without FreeCell, I could not survive as a writer. As you can see by my stats, I’m, er, slightly obsessed. It’s a great way to let your mind wander without getting too caught up in something else; I mean, sure, you’ve got errands to run and dishes to wash and floors to vacuum and kids to feed, but all those things take time and you won’t be able to run back to the computer the moment inspiration hits again.

Do not underestimate the power of the dorky card game.

And also I just really wanted to show off my stats.

Another silly-but-fun thing: Wordle. Stick in your manuscript and see which words occur the most. If you’re at all like me, it’ll be really embarrassing

Then there’s pretty bookmarks, like those you get from The Book Depository or Ms. Magdala Twistleton… (I guess these help with reading more than writing, but hush. It’s book-related, I love it, and it totally counts.

… but I suppose tea and ice cream really do conquer all. Jodi Meadows and I have scientifically proven that ice cream increases writer productivity. True facts, guys.

---

I’m currently on vacation, so may take a while to read your comments – this post was written and scheduled beforehand. Also, there may or may not be a post with slightly more useful writer tools coming up.

Shockingly, I’m still alive. Between beta reading, short story editing, and plotting my next novel, I just haven’t had a heck of a lot to write about.

But then I read The Hunger Games the other day, and a lightbulb went off. Especially after my last WIP, The Hands of Cally Wu, I’m very intrigued by unreliable narrators. As far as I can see, there are three types:

1. The narrator who lies to or purposefully omits information from the reader (see: Justine Larbastelier’s Liar, or any number of first-person detective novels who hide information only to info-dump later)

2. The narrator who is somehow manipulated into thinking or acting a certain way
3. The narrator who makes false assumptions/is biased in some way

The first type can be easier to pull off, because you don’t always have to read between the lines – though depending on the kind of lies, their reactions, etc. you can still make it plenty complex – but at the same time risks irritating the reader. Especially if it’s a first-person narrator, it can feel like a huge cheat to realize you’re not as 100% in the character’s head as you thought.

The second and third usually go over better with readers, but are tricky to pull off in different ways. If it’s too subtle, the full impact of the later revelation that they’re mistaken isn’t as strong as it could be. If it’s too on-the-nose, the reader can easily tell they’re being manipulated into thinking a certain way.

Take Katniss’s initial feelings about Peeta in The Hunger Games, for example. At some point these feelings are so strong (without enough action on his side to justify it) that the reader already knows they’re likely false. This can be intentional – and it’s fun to see narrators go off in entirely the wrong direction sometimes – but risks making the book predictable. Just like, in a heck of a lot of books, the characters who hate each other most will likely end up as love interests.

In another example, I finished an urban fantasy novel a few weeks ago wherein Our Heroine was convinced Character X was evil. The problem: she had very little evidence to base it on. Now, with personal entanglements (like Katniss/Peeta), it’s fun to see characters flounder. When it comes to plot – not so much. I was annoyed at Our Heroine for jumping to conclusions when she could be off chasing actual leads. Even more annoyed when she had Character X beaten savagely because of her suspicions. And even more annoyed when she didn’t really seem to feel all that guilty after she was proven wrong.

I love flawed characters, but, er, there are limits.

Anyway, there were also moments in The Hunger Games when I truly didn’t know if Katniss’s suspicions about some characters were correct. This worked on multiple levels – characterization and plot – which, IMO, was a great way to keep the reader guessing and intrigued.

I’d be very interested in your thoughts on the topic, as well, if you have any to share!

Man, I’m stealing blog topics lately like… um… is there any kind of animal out there that regularly steals blog topics? No? Okay. That’s probably what makes that simile fall kind of flat.

Anyway, this blog post was inspired by a) Jodi Meadows’s excellent post on the things Stargate SG-1 taught her about writing and b) the unrelated realization that, yes, I love TV shows as more than just distraction from writing. I know a lot of people harp on how you shouldn’t watch TV if you can read/write instead, it’s just a waste of time, etc. etc. but I really think that, in addition to the sheer entertainment value and closing-off-your-brain factor you sometimes need as a writer, it’s a great way to study storytelling. It won’t teach you to write prose, but it can teach you plenty about other things, and studying how and why TV shows do what they do can be an excellent way to learn.

Which is a kind of long intro to me saying that, holy crap, I love the TV series Community and if you haven’t seen it yet, you ought to do so. Right this second. Or at the very least when the DVD-set comes out. It’s a very smart comedy which far exceeded my expectations based on its rather standard premise: community college! band of misfits! shenanigans ensue! It’s probably my favourite comedy series in a long time, on par perhaps only with Better Off Ted.

(Which you should also watch.)

Warning: as I discuss what I think Community does right, I’ll use comparisons from certain shows who try to do similar things but don’t pull it off, in my opinion. By ‘certain shows’, I mean Glee. I’ll try to be fair, but my unparalleled loathing of Glee¹ may colour my analysis. Fair warning!

1. Know Thy Tropes
Whether you want to avoid them, subvert them, or ridicule them all to hell – know them. Your audience will, too, and they’ll appreciate being taken by surprise or seeing a clever spin on something they recognize.

This means reading/watching in your genre, and spending a lot of time on TV Tropes. If you don’t know the site, prepare to waste an ungodly amount of hours there.

(Note to self: next time you link to TV Tropes, do it at the end of a post, or you’ll lose readers.)

2. Go There – But Know Where You’re Going
This applies to anything ~controversial~ or otherwise shocking: go there. Don’t back down, don’t play it safe. It’s okay to be outrageous.

But please, know what you’re doing. Don’t just do random shit for the sake of being edgy and then wonder why people are annoyed or offended when you fuck up.

Community is a silly comedy and they regularly tackle issues of racism or sexism in the least PC way possible, and they succeed². Glee is a silly comedy that regularly tackles issues of sexism or racism in the least PC way possible, and they fail on multiple levels, because they’re doing it for kicks without understanding what they’re doing. Sometimes this results in laughs. But usually, when it comes to the issues they address, they do more to alienate the groups they’re trying to support than anything else. I think that’s a shame. With that kind of cast and talent, they could do so much better.

3. A Little Goes A Long Way
Community is a comedy show and it KNOWS this, but it can still tackle solid drama. In one episode – minor spoilers to follow - the students have a Halloween party. One of them, Abed, dresses in a Batman costume and plays the role awesomely, raspy Christian Bale voice et al. Jeff, the lead of the show, is embarrassed by his friends’ immaturity and tries to avoid the party, but keeps getting dragged in. At one point, he snaps:

Jeff: Britta, I don’t care about your high school soap opera. Abed, you’re not Batman.
Abed: I know I’m not Batman. You could try not being a dick.

Paraphrased, since I can’t seem to find the quote online. When I watched this, I went, ouch. When I rewatched the episode with a friend, he gasped.

It’s so simple, so direct, and it works so damn well for both characters. There’s no need to harp on the point whatsoever.

4. Make Up Your Mind
For the most part, Community doesn’t try to be something it’s not, and I love it for that. It’s the same reason I love shows like Chuck: they don’t take themselves too seriously. This doesn’t mean that Community can’t do drama on occasion. Just watch the episode Introduction to Film.

But it does mean that it knows its genre and doesn’t bounce between different styles. Only very few shows (Buffy!) can pull that off without giving the viewer a mental whiplash.

Now, certain shows have a big problem with this. They try to be satirical high school comedies and then interject it with moments of tearful Very Special Episode-style drama, played completely straight. Even people who have liked Glee since the beginning have expressed issues with this, and the more pronounced it gets, the more people are getting annoyed by how the show can’t seem to figure out what it wants to be.

It pains me to say this, but here goes: In its first season finale, Community did the exact same thing. It went from a trope-subverting ensemble cast to a one-man-show that played entirely by the rules, annoying love triangle included, and it irritated a lot of its die-hard fans in the process.

(See? I can be fair and criticize the shows I love!) 

---

¹ Believe me, I gave Glee a fair shot: I started the show fully expecting to love it, and gave it a full season to redeem itself when it didn’t quite catch on. It just ended up annoying me more and more. Sorry, Glee fans. (I still love the singing-and-dancing.)

² It doesn’t succeed all the time. I’ve been rather annoyed with its treatment of Britta and Shirley. Still, it does a lot better than 95% of shows out there, so I think the point is valid.