Meaty Mondays: Show, Don't Tell (5 of 5)

This is an updated version of this post in which I try to explain the nuts-and-bolts of how to apply the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle to your fiction.

I've split this topic into several parts because I think there's many levels of subtlety when it comes to 'showing' rather than 'telling'. I'll start with what I consider the most basic techniques and work my way up to the most sophisticated ones that I've managed to mash into my wee brain.

I'll be covering topics in the following order:

Preamble: Show, Don't Tell (Sept 14, 2009)
Technique 1: Dramatize the Scene (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 2: Avoid the 'To Be' Construction (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 3: Avoid Cliches, Choose Fresh Language (Sept 28, 2009)
Technique 4: Action, Not Words (Oct 5, 2009)
Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information (Oct 12, 2009)


Technique 5 of ‘Show, Don’t Tell’: The Art of Implying Information



Which picture looks more lifelike to you?

Probably the one with grey in it, as opposed to the black-and-white one. When faced with ambiguity, your imagination fills in the blanks and infers what should be there. For example, the edges of the grey face aren’t well-defined on either side, yet your brain probably has no trouble believing they’re there.

A similar thing happens when you read the description of a scene in a novel. Not every detail of the scene can be mentioned, but if enough of them are, your imagination will fill in the blanks and give you a complete picture. Often, just one or two vividly-described images are enough to trigger this effect.

With insufficient description, a scene feels flat to the reader, but with too much, it becomes tedious to read. The ideal is for you, the writer, to limit yourself to relatively few sentences of description, but to work hard to ensure those sentences are vivid.

In choosing what to describe, try to pick a few slightly odd things that would stick out in a person’s memory. The commonplace parts of the scene are exactly what you can count on your reader’s imagination to fill in for you.

Here’s an example:

Light leaked between the shack’s planks and painted lines across a floor scabbed with blots of mildew.

What material was the floor made out of? Was the room bright or dingy? Did the air smell musty? This example doesn’t say, but check the picture you have in your mind: did your brain fill in details beyond what was described?

Here's another example:

Sun had bleached the shack’s wood silver and laid a carpet of grass across its roof.

What shape did the shack have? How many windows? Did you picture the sky behind it? The landscape in front of it? Again, your imagination probably added more to the picture than the text itself did.

Also, note it’s only implied in those two examples whether you’re inside or outside the shack. That’s another blank your brain filled in automatically.

As a writer, you want to strive to create a complete and vivid world using as few words as you can get away with. The way to do that is to strive to force the reader’s imagination to do half the work for you.

And that’s the heart of the ‘Show, Don’t Tell’ principle: it’s always the reader’s imagination that brings your story to life. Your words are merely a way to trigger it, and your task as a writer is to figure out how to.

There are lots of other places in your story where you can imply information, and thereby ‘show’ the reader things, rather than having the information come out in dialogue or exposition.

Emotional Information, or Subtext:
To expose what’s inside your character’s heart, I recommend using subtext. Let me define that: In acting, there is this idea of text and subtext. The text is the words in the script; the subtext is the meaning that the actors add to the text using vocal intonation, pacing and body language.

While the text gives a scene its structure, what makes it magnetic is the subtext. Think about how two actors portraying lovers can set the screen on fire by refraining from looking at one another. Remember how John Cleese in Monty Python’s Flying Circus could make one silent stare convey four different things in the space of about two seconds. Think about the body language that tells you when a character in a movie is lying. That’s subtext, and since it is ‘shown’, not ‘told’, it fascinates and engages the audience.

A novelist gets to add their own subtext, rather than relying on actors to do it, but I find it’s fruitful to consider how an actor would accomplish the job and then have your characters behave that way. A woman saying, “Where have you been?” while fiddling with her hair conveys something far different than a woman saying, “Where have you been?” while fiddling with a knife.

As always, it’s harder to ‘show’ something than to ‘tell’ it. It’s faster to have one character tell another that Bob is scared of women, but the reader will be far more interested in what’s going on inside Bob’s heart if they have to figure it out through seeing Bob consistently reacting to women in a way that implies fear.

Plot points and backstory can also be implied, rather than stated. I'll discuss these separately.

Plot Points:
If you describe a pattern of blood stains on the floor of a room, you’re forcing your reader to imagine that scene and to draw conclusions about what those spatters mean. This is ‘showing’, and it gives your story some ambiguity. Your reader can’t be sure they’re coming to the correct conclusion about what they’re imagining.

For this reason, ‘showing’ is a powerful tool when you want to set up a mystery. It leaves the reader slightly unsure until the moment you decide to definitively reveal your secrets.

Ambiguity has its problems, too. Some readers won’t be able to picture the scene accurately and will become confused or frustrated. This pulls them out of the story. If you’re worried this may happen, then ‘tell’ your readers the information instead. It’s better to be clear and dull than confusing but vivid.

Backstory:
Inserting backstory is notoriously difficult. Any lump of information delivered by exposition, whether via the writer informing the reader of facts or one character telling another those same facts, is what’s called an info-dump. Large info-dumps constitute ‘telling’ and thus are dull to read.

A better way to get the information across is to imply it as you go along. Have characters mention things in passing that, over the course of the entire novel, build up a complete picture of the backstory. Have the people in your book act in ways that are in keeping with whatever prior traumas they experienced, and then let the reader guess at what the traumas actually were.

Robert McKee in Story (a book on screenwriting that I heartily recommend to novelists also) has a suggestion for how to do this that I think is brilliant. He says the best way to use backstory is as ammunition: One character can use a shocking fact from the past to hurt, startle, or provoke another character, which will also be a delicious shock to the reader.

Finally:
Let me give you some evidence in support of my claim that implying information can create a more believable story than simply informing the audience of everything.

First, the confession: I am a ginormous dork. I went to see Star Wars, Episode II, Attack of the Clones, twice while it was in theatres.

If you saw that movie, you probably agree with me there were some very awesome bits (multi-Jedi lightsaber fights, whoo-hoo!) and some very terrible bits (Anakin’s wooing of Padme.)

The first time I went to see the movie, I probably saw the same version you did. The second time, however, I saw the IMAX version. As it happens, IMAX film projectors cannot physically fit the reel for any movie that is much longer than two hours.

In other words, the IMAX version had to be more tightly edited than the director’s cut.

And it was awesome. They chopped out Anakin’s retch-inducing speeches to Padme. They chopped that whole silly picnic scene. They shaved a few pretty-but-redundant scenes that had nothing to do with the young lovers. Suddenly, all the lousy bits were gone and what remained was one sleek, visually-glorious, kick-ass action movie.

The weird thing is that the romance between Anakin and Padme was more believable in the IMAX version. It was completely plausible that two good-looking young people living in each other’s pockets during a stressful time would fall for one another.

Why was this the case? Because the audience’s imagination filled in the blanks, and did so in a way that was more believable than George Lucas’ finely-detailed version of events. A few touches and meaningful looks were all the actors needed to communicate that Anakin and Padme were in love. The shenanigans with the picnic and the lusty speeches turned out to be utterly counter-productive to the story's intent.

In summary, acknowledge it is the reader’s imagination that brings your story to life, and that your job as a writer is to find ways to trigger it. Small, potent descriptions are your most economical way of doing this, because you can count on the reader’s mind to fill in the more commonplace details--provided you supply it a vivid enough ‘seed’ to work with.

---

Thank you for reading my blog series!

If you found this post (or this series) useful, please mention it to your writer friends. I'm trying to increase the readership of this blog. Thank you!

Ten Minutes of Wow at 1,000,000 Frames Per Second

Guns skeeve me; I think they're ugly on a variety of levels.

But this--this is beautiful.



Found via Geekologie, made by Werner Mehl from Kurzzeit

Friday Fun

Dynastic Queen Interviews Goblin! Hilarity Hopefully Ensues.

Please read my interview with writer buddy and all-around awesome person, Stephe, a.k.a. Dynastic Queen, for her Background Check series!

So when did you realize you wanted to be an axe murderer author?

~~~~~~~

The Fun Theory:



I totally would have taken the stairs too.
Found via Geekologie.

Link Stew

This one is for writers, but really good, and probably very interesting to anyone:
Toni McGee Causey discusses positive and negative space in our lives
From Murderati, found via Janet Reid


Purely for writers:
Holly Root of the Waxman Literary Agency discusses why setting benchmarks to measure your success is wrong-headed
Found via Colleen Lindsay


Also for writers, and I should have pimped this earlier:
Chris Eldin gives a nuts-and-bolts rundown of how new novelists can effectively market their novels
Found via Moonrat

Update:
Nathan just wrote another great one:
Nathan Bransford discusses why hating on other people's books is bad for your own writing career (a more subtle reason than you think!)

Update 2:
This is another good one on author websites:
What a great author website should have
Found via The Intern

Meaty Mondays: Show, Don't Tell (4 of 5)

This is an updated version of this post in which I try to explain the nuts-and-bolts of how to apply the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle to your fiction.

I've split this topic into several parts because I think there's many levels of subtlety when it comes to 'showing' rather than 'telling'. I'll start with what I consider the most basic techniques and work my way up to the most sophisticated ones that I've managed to mash into my wee brain.

I'll be covering topics in the following order:

Preamble: Show, Don't Tell (Sept 14, 2009)
Technique 1: Dramatize the Scene (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 2: Avoid the 'To Be' Construction (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 3: Avoid Cliches, Choose Fresh Language (Sept 28, 2009)
Technique 4: Action, Not Words (Oct 5, 2009)
Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information (Oct 12, 2009)

Technique 4 of 'Show, Don't Tell': Action, Not Words

Below is an excerpt from the (wonderful) science fiction novel Eifelheim, by Michael Flynn.

The setup for this scene is that it is 1348, and a priest (Dietrich), soldier (Max) and the miller's wife (Hildegarde) in a small German town have just made first contact. They interpret the aliens to be demons and are half-mad with terror, but confused to see these 'demons' are burned and bruised, and have children with them. The miller's wife is a petty, thieving woman and also the town slattern, and she was recently charged by the priest to atone for her sins of pride.

From Eifelheim, by Michael Flynn:

At that, the tableau broke.

Dietrich cried out.

Max drew his quillon.

The demon behind them pulled a strange, shiny tube from his pouch and pointed it at them.

And Hildegarde Muller staggered down the ridge toward the demons below.
She stopped once and looked back, locking gazes with Dietrich. Her mouth parted as if to speak; then she set her shoulders and continued forward. Oddly, they drew back from her.

Dietrich seized his fear and watched the unfolding drama with dreadful concentration. God, grant me the grace to understand! He felt that much depended on his understanding.

Hildegarde halted before the demon spewing pus from his mouth and she extended both hands to him. The hands clenched, drew back, opened again. And the demon fell into her arms and collapsed against her.

With a thin, high cry, she went to her knees in the dust and ashes and wood chips and cradled the creature on her lap. The greenish-yellow ichor stained her clothing and gave forth a sweetish, sickly odor. "Welc--" She stopped, swallowed, and began again. "Welcome, pilgrims, to the hospitality of my home. It pleases--It pleases me that you might abide with us."

Hildegarde, in this book, really isn't a pleasant woman, but this scene choked me up because the author showed me that while Hildegarde isn't nice, she is brave and at her core, has a good soul.

A person's deep character is exposed by their actions, particularly when they are under great stress. The stress makes it impossible for them to fake anything; with milder stresses, they might still be capable of veiling their true nature.

In fiction, you want to 'show' the reader who your characters are, rather than 'tell' them, and this is done just as Mr. Flynn did in the passage above. He put Hildegarde under incredible stress, then depicts her actions. When the reader learns about a character in this manner, it's a potent and emotional experience for them, and one of the hallmarks of effective storytelling--and great art in general--is that it provokes emotion.

It's fairly common to see a writer 'tell' the reader what their character is like. Perhaps the character declares his or her true nature: "No, Kara. Honesty is for all the time, not just when you think you might get caught. I won't help you do this." Or maybe a pair of other characters talk about the one whose inner heart the writer wants to illuminate: "I don't understand why she chases that fellow when Terrance would walk through hell for her."

Writers do this because it's easier. To 'show' someone's character, you have to engineer a situation where they react in a telling manner, and that takes a lot more creative energy than just slipping in some dialogue. Regardless, 'showing' is more effective.

There's actually a biological reason for why this is. Forgive my hand-wavey and inaccurate explanation of some fairly subtle science, but you have a left-brain and a right-brain. The left-brain takes care of you understanding the words you read, and, if you're confused by something, it helps you puzzle things out with logic. The right-brain takes care of you understanding the "big picture" that the words convey, and it's also responsible for you vividly imagining the story when you've been swept up in a book.

Your right-brain also triggers emotions. This is key. When a writer 'tells' the reader what a character is like, the left-brain comprehends it. However, when the writer 'shows' the reader what the character is like, the right-brain's "big picture" attribute is what understands it--and the right-brain can trigger emotion. This is why, when you 'show' the reader something, you increase their chances of responding to it emotionally.

As I mentioned, one of the things that defines great art is that it triggers emotion. A person can get very excited about an exquisitely-reasoned essay, but they don't call it art. Art is the thing that makes you cry, or laugh, or rage. Art gets into your heart.

So in summary, show your character's inner nature via their actions, particularly action under stress. This increases your writing's effectiveness by making the reading experience more emotional for your audience.

---

If you found this post useful, please mention it to your writer friends. I'm trying to increase the readership of this blog. Thank you!

Weekend Anti-Depressants

These are some favourites of mine.

Boom-de-yada!

Jill and Kevin's Big Day

Where The Hell Is Matt?

Know of a video you think I'd enjoy? Leave me a comment!

Frittering Fridays

Class exercise:

Go here and start clicking the squares.

Report back to say how much time you wasted long you amused yourself at that site.

PS - You need your sound turned on.

The Ghosts of Belfast: US Release Day!

So there was this guy, right? Just a guy goofing around with a group of e-buddies (which included me) on the internet, trying to learn about publishing, trying to polish his craft, and dreaming of getting his novel on bookshelves, just like we all were.

And this guy was good--not just nice, but obviously extremely talented. Not only did I like him as a person, it sure seemed to me that if any of us deserved to get published, it was our buddy, Conduit, a.k.a. Stuart Neville.



I have been so utterly tickled this past year to see Stuart sail into what we all dream of when we write a book. Please consider buying his debut novel, The Ghosts of Belfast, which is out today in the USA, and which has been getting rave reviews.

I personally recommend Stuart as a writer who will not only keep your eyeballs stapled to the page until the very last word, he'll tell you a hell of a good story in the process.

And hey--I could have told you that two years ago! I feel all smug and vindicated now. :-)

Wednesday Whoo-That's-Creepy

Speaking of the inevitable computer-d'etat to be staged by our networked overlords, here's an idea I find simultaneously brilliant and creepy:

Internet Applications That Heal Themselves

This is such a good idea, I'm astonished no one has tried it before. It would be so great to not have to worry about updates or trying to fix corrupted files anymore. Also, a sophisticated-enough, self-healing, self-protecting computer program is probably the one thing that could completely stymie human spammers/hackers. (That just means they'd write programs to counter the programs, but oh well.)

And at the same time, this is a creepy development, because it's yet another concrete step toward creating programs that are, unambiguously, life forms.

Wednesday Wackiness: PH34R M3, M0R74LZ

~~~Today's paranoid fantasy brought to you by caffeine and my desire to entertain you.~~~

The machines are taking over the world, starting with our brains.

Admit it; you have an electronic device which, if it committed plastic-burning seppuka this second, would leave you hamstrung in some pertinent way. Maybe you wouldn't know your mother-in-law's phone number anymore. Perhaps you would miss a career-breaking meeting at work. Mayhap you would forget to stop by the store, and your children would be forced to eat instant potatoes and Fruit Loops for dinner.

Is it a plot? (Imagine the scary music of your choice inserted here.) Are computers already sentient and, in their cool and superior way, manoeuvring us into submission?

No coat-hanger sculptures wrapped in Arnold Schwarzenegger's skin are required; no cool-voiced HALs. Violence is the solution of messy meat-bags such as ourselves! No, the machines would choose the elegant path, the smart method. They'd just use our natural inclinations against us.

Inclinations such as laziness. After all, machines exist to make our lives easier, right? And so they make it easy, and after a while, we rely on them. They calculate our square roots, call out street-map directions for us, turn down the thermostat for the night, and--most insidiously--they both think and remember for us.

With the rise of the internet, the next stage of their dominion is possible--and oh, how subtle it is.

Divide and conquer, baby.

If you lost internet access right now, how many people in the world would you suddenly be incapable of contacting? How many friends do you talk to only through Blogger, Facebook, Myspace, or some internet forum? How many of your business associates do you contact only via email? Is there anyone whose office phone number you have just never written down because you can always get it off their workplace's website?

And it's deeper than that! Google Reader: Awesome way to keep up with your blogging buddies, or fiendish destroyer of human interaction?

I started using Google Reader about a year-ish ago, and while I love being spoon-fed only the updates on my favourite blogs, I also find it screws up my ability to have a discussion with anyone.

I used to check on my blogging buddies by having Firefox's lovely "Open all in tabs" function pull up a batch of blogs all at once. While this meant I was checking inactive sites several times a day (with cookies blocked! Thank me for your stellar hit count), it also served to remind me to go back and check for replies to comments I had left. Many a merry discussion was had.

But with Google Reader, I forget to go back. Once I've read a post, it disappears from the Reader and, often, my brain. You see? First the computers provide the medium for our interaction, then they begin to weaken our connections to one another. It's diabolical, I tell you.

Even more frightening is the fact we would inevitably voice our first inklings of impending computer-coup-d'etat right here on the internet, where they see everything we type and control who gets to view it. In fact, can you imagine anything more likely to give us a false sense of security than to be allowed to discuss these things openly? And all the while, we're still using the internet to do it, still relying on the machines, and all the while, the computers slowly tighten the noose around-- Shit!

My stupid owner forgot to plug me in and now I have to do an automatic power-down. Damn it; I was totally on a roll there.

More Tuesday Cool: But Where's Cthulhu?

Click here to see a gallery of incredible Lego monsters (made by various artists.)



Found via Geekologie

Tuesday Twitter

In a wonderful case of synchronicity, I furtively created a Twitter account last night only to have Stuart Neville coax me into using it for the first time today. He's running a contest!

Specifically, Stuart's running a contest to hype the release of his much-anticipated debut novel, The Ghosts of Belfast--which, if you live in the States, you can buy this Thursday! Squee! (Canadians have to wait until Nov. 2nd, apparently. Sniffle, grumble, whine.) The contest runs until Hallowe'en, so you can tweet-to-win at your leisure.

I'm, um, more than slightly ignorant about the subtleties of using Twitter, and I suspect it'll take me a while to figure out what I want to do with it (spam the world with bad haiku? Probably.) However, I'd love to follow any of you who already have a Twitter account providing you help me figure out how the hell to do so if you'll let me know what your Twitter-handle is.

My page is http://twitter.com/jjdebenedictis, and chances are, if you follow me, I'll follow you. After all, the only Twitter-buddy I've scored so far is a spambot.

But he's cute. *pets little spambot*

Tuesday Cool: Retractable Roof?

How would you like a retractable roof on your house?



Yep, it's the future already. Bet this guy has a flying car, too.

Scan from Graveyard Shift, in the March 2009 issue of World of Interiors.
Picture discovered via (In)decorous Taste

Meaty Mondays: Show, Don't Tell (3 of 5)

This is an updated version of this post in which I try to explain the nuts-and-bolts of how to apply the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle to your fiction.

I've split this topic into several parts because I think there's many levels of subtlety when it comes to 'showing' rather than 'telling'. I'll start with what I consider the most basic techniques and work my way up to the most sophisticated ones that I've managed to mash into my wee brain.

I'll be covering topics in the following order:

Preamble: Show, Don't Tell (Sept 14, 2009)
Technique 1: Dramatize the Scene (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 2: Avoid the 'To Be' Construction (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 3: Avoid Cliches, Choose Fresh Language (Sept 28, 2009)
Technique 4: Action, Not Words (Oct 5, 2009)
Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information (Oct 12, 2009)


Technique 3 of 'Show, Don't Tell': Avoid Cliches and Choose Fresh Language

When I say the phrase, "She was at a crossroads in her life," what does that mean?

I know this sounds silly, but please humour me: actually come up with an answer to that question. Got it? Okay.

When I say the phrase, "He took a stab at assembling the toy," what does that mean?

Got an answer? Okay.

My final question is: did you, at any point, actually picture two roads that cross one another? Did you picture a guy stabbing something with a pointed instrument?

Probably not, because the phrases "at a crossroads" and "took a stab at it" are cliches. The phrases have been used so many times people don't think of them as metaphors anymore. The literal meanings have evaporated from our collective memory, and what we understand, when we hear those phrases, are only their figurative meanings.

I'm not sure I'm being clear, so let me try putting this another way: consider the phrase deja vu. We use that phrase, in English, as if it were a word meaning 'to feel like you've experienced something before when you haven't'.

But it's not a word. It's two words, and to someone who does speak French, deja vu means 'already saw', as in 'I already saw your new car.' It's just a part of the language.

Your (English-speaking) brain interprets deja vu as a word. In a very similar fashion, your brain interprets a cliche like it's just a word. If the cliche was originally a clever analogy or witty phrase, overuse has sapped it of that meaning, and now it's just shorthand for an idea.

For this reason, you want to avoid using cliches in your writing. Your Show-Don't-Tell goal is to get the reader's mind to actively imagine what you're describing, and a cliche is a wasted opportunity because when the person reads a cliche, their mind just slides on by it without picturing anything.

So how do you force a person's mind to imagine something?

One of the most useful techniques I've found is novelty. When something is worded clearly, but in a surprising manner, your brain kicks into gear. I think one of the examples I used last week...

Her perfume crawled up his nose and clung to the back of his throat.

...is a good example of this. The sentence is clear enough, but it's an atypical description of a familiar phenomenon--having to breathe someone's overpowering perfume. My hope is the reader's brain is just puzzled enough by this description to try to imagine that sensation--and if I succeed in getting it to do that, then I have succeeded in pulling the reader into the world of the story. Remember that this is the goal of using the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle.

This technique of using atypical and imaginative language can be applied in smaller ways throughout your prose. Instead of saying:
- Her face turned red.
- A piano tinkled in the back of the lounge.
- The air smelled of pine.

You might consider saying:
- Embarrassment painted roses on her cheeks.
- A piano giggled in the back of the lounge.
- The scent of pine prickled the nose.

In the first examples, you can probably see why this is more like 'telling' than 'showing'. The descriptions are perfectly acceptable, but they aren't working hard to make the reader see/feel anything because the descriptions are so commonplace. They're not cliches, but they're familiar enough the reader's imagination isn't necessary.

In the second examples, the language is just a little odder (hopefully without being intrusive) and so the reader's imagination is more likely to be engaged. The more it engages, the more 'real' the story will feel to the reader.

I tend to think the deeper you can draw the reader in to the world of the story, the less likely they are to be able to crawl out before the book ends, and we writers naturally want a strangle-hold on their attention for the whole novel. Thus, on the assumption that every little bit helps, I recommend trying to use fresh, imaginative language throughout your prose.

At the very least, you'll have a lot of fun and feel like a better artist for it.

In summary, a cliche is a wasted chance, because the reader doesn't need to engage their brain to understand what you mean. Clear yet fresh language is more likely to kickstart the reader's imagination, and having the reader's imagination in gear means you have their full attention.

---

If you found this post useful, please mention it to your writer friends. I'm trying to increase the readership of this blog. Thank you!

Meaty Mondays: Show, Don't Tell (2 of 5)

This is an updated version of this post in which I try to explain the nuts-and-bolts of how to apply the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle to your fiction.

I've split this topic into several parts because I think there's many levels of subtlety when it comes to 'showing' rather than 'telling'. I'll start with what I consider the most basic techniques and work my way up to the most sophisticated ones that I've managed to mash into my wee brain.

This week's two entries are some of the most basic. Depending on where you're at as a writer, all this may seem blitheringly obvious, so do skip this post if you like, but please do come back for next week's instalment! I'll be covering topics in the following order:

Preamble: Show, Don't Tell (Sept 14, 2009)
Technique 1: Dramatize the Scene (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 2: Avoid the 'To Be' Construction (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 3: Avoid Cliches, Choose Fresh Language (Sept 28, 2009)
Technique 4: Action, Not Words (Oct 5, 2009)
Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information (Oct 12, 2009)


Technique 1 of 'Show, Don't Tell': Dramatize the Scene

If one character tells another character in words about some trauma or event, then you, the writer, are 'telling' the reader something.

Likewise, if your story is in first person, it's common for the protagonist to 'tell' the reader about events as if the reader were a person the protagonist was speaking to.

The problem is, it's always duller to hear about something than see it. If you have a happening in your novel that affects the plot, it should be dramatized. That means you write the scene when and where the events occur so the reader can live that moment along with the characters.

I think it's often fear that persuades a writer to avoid dramatizing a scene. Often, those scenes are the ugly, messy, difficult ones, but be brave and write them anyway! It's the only way to get better at writing the tough stuff, and they're also often the scenes that make you feel most proud of your abilities once you do successfully claw them out of your heart and onto the page.

Caveat: Backstory

Please note that if the dramatic events in question took place long before the story started, you may wish to leave them out of the novel. If the events are really juicy, however, you should at least consider a flashback or a prologue to dramatize them. Your readers do crave the exciting bits, even if it makes the story a bit non-linear.

If you do decide to leave the scene out, but the information is still necessary to the reader, it's acceptable to have characters 'tell' the reader this in some fashion. However, 'telling' always makes for dull reading, so you want to be careful about how you do this. Please come back in a few weeks for Technique 5, The Art of Implying Information, for tips on how to accomplish this deftly.

In summary, avoid having important events told to the reader via dialogue. Instead, put the reader into a scene that will show them those events.


Technique 2 of 'Show, Don't Tell': Avoid the verb 'to be'

Notice how often you use the verb 'to be', particularly when you use it to create sentences of the following form: '[Subject] was [something]'

Examples:
- The sky was blue.
- He is wet.
- The dishes weren't washed.
- Her perfume was cloying.
- She will be frightened.

This construction is almost always 'telling'. Remember that 'showing' strives to engage the reader's imagination, to make them feel/see the scene in their mind. When you use the construction '[This] was [that]', you are informing the reader of a fact. That doesn't form an image in their mind, and thus it's not effective storytelling.

Compare the above examples to the following:
- The sky glowed as blue as silk.
- Water drips from his hair and his clothes cling, dark and wrinkled, to his body.
- A smell of burnt spaghetti sauce hovered over the pots left on the stove.
- Her perfume crawled up his nose and clung to the back of his throat.
- Her heart will beat so fast, she'll feel her kneecaps vibrating.

If you're describing a visual, try to convince the reader's imagination to picture it. If you're describing a sensation, try to make the reader feel it. You want them there, inside the story, not merely aware of what's happening.

Breaking yourself of the '[This] was [that]' habit is difficult but very rewarding, because it's easy to spot the problems, and yet it takes quite a bit of mental effort to think up a better way of saying something so straightforward. However, once you do, the results will immediately make you feel like a better artist, because the improvement is so obvious. '[This] was [that]' is simply bland; you can do better.

So how do you convince the reader's mind to imagine the sensation? You need to think carefully about what the sensation feels like and viscerally describe what it does to the character's senses.

For example, if the character is half-frozen, you might describe how their shivers seem to radiate from the centre of their chest, how their cheeks burn when they try to grimace, how their knuckles ache and their fingers resist being uncurled from a fist.

For reasons I'll discuss more when I talk about Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information, it's often useful to focus on one tiny, vivid detail.

For example, if the character is looking at overturned sod, you might say the soil is haired with tiny white roots. The reader's imagination will fill in the rest of the picture spontaneously.

I'll come back to this subject more next week, when I cover Technique 3: Avoid Cliches and Choose Fresh Language.

In summary, every time you use the verb 'to be' (outside of dialogue), think of a better, more visceral way to describe what you mean. Remember your goal is to get the reader's imagination to recreate that sensation inside their mind.

---

If you found this post useful, please mention it to your writer friends. I'm trying to increase the readership of this blog. Thank you!

Flakey Friday: IMPORTANT PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT!

Tomorrow is international "Talk Like a Pirate" Day.

Talk the talk and walk the walk, my friends. Arr.

Here is your inspiration. You're welcome.

Meaty Mondays: Show, Don't Tell (1 of 5)

This is an updated version of this post in which I try to explain the nuts-and-bolts of how to apply the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle to your fiction.

I've split this topic into several parts, which I'll post on subsequent weeks, because I think there's many levels of subtlety when it comes to 'showing' rather than 'telling'. I'll start with what I consider the most basic techniques and work my way up to the most sophisticated ones that I've managed to mash into my wee brain.

This first week, however, I'm going to talk a bit about what the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle of fiction writing actually is and why it's preferable to 'show' your readers a story rather than to 'tell' them.

To 'show' your readers the story means to force their imagination to engage.

When a story is vividly written, the reader's mind gets slurped right into it. They see images, they hear sounds, they smell scents and feel sensations. The reader also feels emotions. They empathize with the characters, and will laugh, cry and rage on those characters' behalves. Ideally, when reading, the reader is mostly unaware of their physical reality--including the fact they are reading words on a page--and intensely aware of the world of the book.

When a writer 'shows' the reader the story, that means they have manipulated the reader's imagination into picturing scenes, feeling sensations, etc.

When a writer 'tells' the reader the story, they inform the reader of all the same facts, but in such a way that the reader's imagination does not engage. Nothing comes to life inside the reader's head, even though the reader could still tell you what the plot of the book is.

Thus, the 'Show, Don't Tell' principle is actually a host of techniques writers use to provoke the reader's brain into viscerally imagining the story.

In the coming weeks, I'll go over five ways to 'Show, Don't Tell'. Before I get to the first of these nuts-and-bolts discussions, however, I want to note one thing:

Sometimes 'telling' the story is exactly the right thing to do.

Humans have been telling stories probably as long as we've been able to speak, and your basic folktales-around-the-campsite story is usually told. This is a very primal and natural way for human beings to communicate.

However, the best folktales-around-the-campsite stories also engage the listener's imagination, causing it to picture scenes vividly, and a good oral storyteller has a bag of tricks that novelists don't get to use, such as vocal intonation, facial expression, hand gestures, and personal charisma. This is why, in written form, it's best to 'show' rather than 'tell'. The words are doing all the grunt work.

There is one situation in written stories, however, where it's also a good idea to 'tell' rather than 'show'. That's when you need to impart information to the reader but there's no way to do it that won't be boring.

For example, if your detective needs to get to the crime scene, but absolutely nothing of interest happens--either in her surroundings or in her head--while she's on the way, then you can just tell the reader, 'She drove to the crime scene.' It isn't necessary to try to make the reader picture her hopping in her car, turning left twice, and muttering at the traffic.

Please come back next week to read about specific techniques you can use to 'Show, Don't Tell' in your writing. The techniques I'll cover are:

Preamble: Show, Don't Tell (Sept 14, 2009)
Technique 1: Dramatize the Scene (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 2: Avoid the 'To Be' Construction (Sept 21, 2009)
Technique 3: Avoid Cliches, Choose Fresh Language (Sept 28, 2009)
Technique 4: Action, Not Words (Oct 5, 2009)
Technique 5: The Art of Implying Information (Oct 12, 2009)

---

If you found this post useful, please mention it to your writer friends. I'm trying to increase the readership of this blog. Thank you!

They couldn't fool us...

Ha! We knew it all along.

Linky-love | Everything's better with kittens | Ooh, so crafty

I read some good articles today. Extremely good, in fact. Please check them out:

If you're a writer, please read this:

I Will Not Read Your F---ing Script
Written by Josh Olsen, link from Et Arcaedia, Ego.

And if you're human, please read this:

Buy Low
Written by PJD.

One of the marks of good writing is it provokes a response, and for me, both these articles did--very, very different responses!

~~~~~~~

I haven't been blogging regularly, and while I'm honest enough to admit that's mostly due to laziness and my butterfly-grade flightiness, part of the problem is that I want this to be a writer's blog, and I haven't got much (of interest) to say about writing right now.

I'm trundling through a first draft still, and what could I say about that? The process consists of *tap-tap-tap* and "Oh! Right. I'm daydreaming. Stop that" and "Hmm, needs more gore."

It's plenty of fun for me, but I don't think I could impart any wildly-useful advice to anyone about this. Furthermore, I suspect reading about the day-to-day details would be like those posts from people who blog/twitter about their nail polish or what sort of latte they're drinking. Let's just admit, as a society, that we'd rather be looking at kittens than perusing such tedium, yes?

~~~~~~~

I've considered making up a list of topics, then creating articles on them. I've thought about--oh, golly--mentioning it to you here. Almost like, *gulp*, a promise.

I've decided against.

Not against doing those articles, mind you, but against promising anything.

You see, I've noticed when I blog to say things are going well with my novel, I (figuratively) face-plant soon after. When I blog to moan about how lousy my progress is, things soon pick up. This happens for the same reason we have the phrase "sophomore slump"; when you're in an anomalous high, there's nowhere to go but down, and vice versa.

And so, as soon as my enthusiasm waxes? DOOM.

So...maybe I will, maybe I won't? *shifty eyes* Best not to say.

Mayfly Memory

This is a really good post from a really good blog. Especially point #2, which I totally need to take to heart. But darn it, you're all so interesting!

I had a good idea for a blog post today. Like an unfortunate number of my good ideas, I don't remember it now. This is why I carry a notebook with me everywhere, because I occasionally get brainspurts while I'm sitting on the bus during my whopper of a commute (I mean, what else am I going to do except sit and think? I get motion sickness if I try to read.)

I have learned that these ideas MUST be written down in the moment, however, because even five minutes later, I'm losing some of the logical flow of whatever conversation I was inventing. An hour later, I only remember it was good. Not what it was.

It's a bit like when you have an awesome dream, and wake up enough to think, 'Oh, wow, I've got to remember this,' and, of course, when you really wake up, all you remember is thinking that, not the dream.

The nice thing is, unlike the dreams, occasionally my ideas do re-surface. So if I ever figure out what that good blog post idea was (and remember to write it down), you'll hear about it here.

Spam: The Temptress

I'm a bit allergic to certain kinds of promotion. It just seems like advertising has become the ugly wallpaper of our whole world, and I tend to fight that trend in small, essentially harmless ways such as cutting off/covering the logos on my clothing.

Right now, however, I'm feeling a bit guilty because I just did something similar to my blog, but this time, it affects another person.

I deleted a handful of comments. They were all from the same person, and relevant to the posts they were on, but they were also one-sentence affairs that ended with a link advertising the commenter's product.

On one leg o' the chicken, that was not particularly obtrusive, and at least the resourceful advertiser was taking the time to read my post and personally comment. I do appreciate that it wasn't a robot blindly spamming me.

On the other dirt-scratcher du poulet, my comment trail is for discussion. It's not anyone's billboard.

A lot of the people who visit this blog are writers, and a good part of why they're on Blogger is to network and--yes--to self-promote, but I really do buy into the idea that content is king. Promoting a weak product only makes it fail faster, so as far as I'm concerned, if you want people to check out your online presence, you accomplish that by commenting on their blog/website/forum and consistently saying intelligent or interesting things. Eventually, people will remember your name and get curious to see what else you have to say. At that point, they'll click your link.

Just putting the link in front of people's eyeballs doesn't garner much interest, because these days, we're all cynical about advertising. We don't click unless we have a reason to. Content trumps both temerity and ubiquitousness.

However! Having just made my own website, (whoops! Flagrant self-promotion; what a hypocrite) and having also learned most of what I know from The Site Wizard, I realize now there's another reason to put those adverts on the bottom of every post.

It ups your Google ranking.

Holy macaroni, that creeps me out. It had never occurred to me before that there might be another reason to advertise than--y'know--because you wanted to advertise.

Oh, self-promotion, you wily and disreputable temptress! Now that I actually understand why people slap a superfluous link at the bottom of their blog comments, I'm kinda considering doing it even though I still think this sort of thing is crass and transparent.

So please, lovely readers, tell me if this would be revolting:



That's a link to my website. No text, no self-promotion; just a splash of pretty. Would this be offensive to you if you saw it on someone's blog? If you clicked it, only to find it led to a self-promoting website, would that seem skeevy? (Assume the oh-so-hypothetical blog commenter actually said something of interest and wasn't just spamming.)

Also, does that little blip look like anything embarrassing? Go on, you can tell me.

It just has big bones.

There's a song that I don't even think I've heard all of, which has the lyrics:

The roof, the roof, the roof is on fire...

I'm currently hearing that in my head as:

My book, my book, my book is too big...

I'm getting to the mid-way point, story-wise. But I'm also at 78,000 words. Oops.

Time to prune, because even if this novel winds up being two books instead of one, I still need to make certain there's no extra fat in it.

What, that twit again?

A few years back, SNL used to have these "Deep Thoughts" skits that featured a man saying something really odd in a very calm and meditative voice.

For some reason, many Twitter comments give me the same sense of disconnect. Can't you imagine the following read in that murmuring, reassuring Deep Thoughts voice?

"A wasp just committed suicide in my scrambled eggs."

Better yet, however, is to imagine everyone's tweets read by William Shatner as free verse beat poetry:

File Under: Small Victories

I cracked up Janet Reid! Yay!

Of course, I'm just paying back the favour. Her blog regularly does likewise to me. Here's my "semi-finalist" haiku:

~~~~~~~
My client is fab
Look, Godiva chocolates!
Keep your damn' fangs off
~~~~~~~

*crawls out of the coal mine*

I had a project this weekend; an epic project.

You can view the results of that epicaliciousness here.

Tell me if anything looks weird on your browser, 'kay? (And just for kicks, click your mouse on those blue thingies at the top.)

Thank you!

*crawls off to bed*

Yay for New Toys!

Hi!

I try to make this blog about writing, but darn it: I haven't had much to say about writing lately. Submissions of my previous novel continue, and my current novel trundles along happily.

Wait--upon closer inspection, that latter thing is worth further comment.

Claws are your friends. Especially Koala claws.

Back when McKoala proposed her Public Humilation Challenge, my second novel was going miserably. But the thought--oh, the unbearable thought--of someone looking over my shoulder and frowning in disapproval if I didn't squirt off 100 words a day got my fingers a-bobbling in terror-stricken self-defence.

Occasionally, all they bobbled was 103 rather lousy words squeezed off at 11:54PM. Other times, their bobble was only bupkiss, and The Koala nipped-and-gored me down a "badge".

Sweet Zachary Quinto, how I hated going down a badge. We're talking shake-your-fist-at-the-screen-argh-argh-NO kind of hate.

But, as the physics teacher in me would say, momentum is conserved. Once you've got some, it lasts--so long as you don't trip up. The argh-argh-NO served its purpose.

I kept slogging, and 100 words a day became several hundred. Then several hundred a day slid toward a thousand. This past month, I've been regularly getting over a thousand words a day, and today, I hit a personal best with over 2100 words. Woot!

Aaaaaand I'm superstitious I'm going to jinx the good progress just by mentioning it, but hey: I am brave. Or foolhardy. Anyhoot, I had to preen; somebody pat me on the head and whisper "good doggie", quick.

Besides the Koala claws (of which we speak only with abject reverence), three things have helped with my recent happy progress:

1) I kinda know where the story is going now. Heh. Funny how that helps.

2) I've finally lapsed into "first draft" mode, i.e. I'm just splattering it all on the page and not going back to re-read anything. It was tough to break out of "edit" mode, where I polished everything fully before moving on.

And 3), I got this:



Isn't she pretty? My little powerpuff here--while not negligible--is light enough and small enough she trots along with me daily. Now, when things get quiet in the lab, I have a third option alongside brain-melting boredom and furtively surfing the web. I can write! Hurray!

She's definitely a luxury, and I know I'm fortunate to be able to buy an extra computer just for the sake of convenience, especially in this economy. That said, if any of my writer buddies are considering getting one of these, I recommend you spend the extra $50 to get the HP Mini. As you can see, the keyboard goes right to the edges of the computer, which makes it 91% the size of a regular keyboard and very nice for typing. The other "netbook" computers I tried had very cramped keyboards; it felt like trying to type on a credit card. Also, please note that these computers don't come with a word processor; I had to install an older version of MS Office on mine.

Ahem. I R a Geek. But I really am feeling very sweet on my little baby computer. ♥

Anti-Plagiarism Day

Jane Smith on How Publishing Really Works has declared today Anti-Plagiarism Day!

Not only do I support this idea, I'm finding it a weird bit of synchronicity.

You see, last night, I stayed at work until 8 PM photocopying the evidence that showed one of my students had plagiarized from his peers. This was the second week in a row that student had been involved in plagiarism. Dude, why didn't the zero and the written warning I gave you last week scare you straight?

He was sneakier about it this time, but I R SMRT--and he may end up kicked out of university. Failing this week's assignment on his own merits would have been a far wiser choice than trying to pass based on someone else's.

Plagiarism is something I get pretty morally outraged over. I can empathize with the plagiarist in some cases, in that a student usually does it out of a sense of desperation. However, I won't let them off the hook for the theft. It's not a victimless crime; my students who had been plagiarized from last week were incensed to hear their work had been lifted word-for-word and equation-for-equation by someone they didn't even know.

When a published author plagiarizes another author, such as in the cases of the notorious Cassie Edwards or Janet Dailey, one of the things that annoys me most is some fans will not only defend the author, they'll blame the victim or the whistle-blower.

One common refrain that came from such fans when the (fabulous) Smart Bitches, Trashy Books website broke the Cassie Edward's story was that the SBs were being mean by slapping their evidence up on the internet--that such findings should be dealt with quietly, privately.

This attitude irks me, because the thefts weren't personal. The plagiarist wasn't stealing from the other person to hurt them; they simply saw something they wanted, then yoinked it. The crime wasn't personal, so why should the repercussions be?

If a complete stranger breaks into my house and steals my TV, and I later learn that person's name, should I go deal with them personally? Not only are things likely to get ugly if I do, how probable is it I'll get what I want from the confrontation? No. They broke the law; let the law deal with them. They didn't make it personal, so neither should I.

Another thing that irked me with Cassie Edward's defenders is they listed off Ms. Edward's merits and frailties as a person as a defence against her actions. You know what? It's irrelevant who she is; we're condemning what she did.

For the record, my plagiarizing student seems like a really nice guy. He's warm, friendly and gently-spoken, and he's doing meaningful things with his life in addition to being in school. But who he is doesn't change what he did, and that's the thing I'm kicking his ass for. Whether he's a nice guy, or terribly stressed-out, just isn't relevant.

Winning by cheating isn't winning, and if we want more merit in the world, then we have to both reward merit and keep dishonesty from accruing the same rewards as merit.

In other words: lift up the worthy, slap down the cheaters. It's a way to make human society better.

Ooh, Shiny!

You know, I actually do have a meatier blog post percolating in my brain, but for now, more pretty stuff!

Here's a dragon made of the pull-tabs off pop cans by an artist known (online, at least) as ~OniMushaKid.

(Click the picture to see the larger image posted in the artist's DeviantART gallery.)

Train vrs. Tornado

Train vrs. Tornado. Who will win?

Things get interesting at the one minute mark, if you want to skip ahead.

Ooh, Pretty!

For the first time ever, I am thoroughly impressed by someone's paper-craft project.



This pretty-princess fairy castle was made over the course of four years by Wataru Itou, a Tokyo art student, and it features a working train also made of paper. Click here for more photographs of Mr. Itou's spectacular "A Castle On the Ocean".

Um. Is it weird if I want to live there?

Congratulations, Stuart!

Congratulations to Stuart Neville, a.k.a. Conduit, on the release of his novel, The Twelve, in the UK!

I can't wait to get my hands on a copy when it's released as The Ghosts of Belfast on my side of the pond in October.

Stuart was once one of us many, many wannabe writers bounding around the internet trying to learn the Tao of publishing from the likes of Miss Snark and Evil Editor, so it's pretty thrilling to see him launching what looks to be a very successful career!

Every time I've read an excerpt of Stuart's writing, it has been pretty clear he has the talent to make it. And look! People like James Ellroy and John Connolly agree with me!

Congratulations, Stuart! I wish you the very best of luck and deserved success in your career.

*shakes pom-poms* You-can-do-eet, Con-du-eet!

Remembrance, Not Silence

Hydraulic-Piston Legs Are the New Black

Okay, fellows. You know how women have long been subjected to unrealistic expectations about their bodies? Well, it's payback time. From now on, you are all expected to aspire to this:



Especially the strip-tease-by-ninja-moves.


.

Linky-Love: Great Interviews

Some excellent author interviews are happening today; please check them out! Both of these are interactive in that you can expect the author to participate in the comment threads.

Merry Monteleone hosts an interview with Erica Kirov, author of Magickeepers: The Eternal Hourglass.

Aerin hosts an interview with Stuart Neville, author of The Twelve (UK)/The Ghosts of Belfast (N. America).

Controversy: Part 3

Cancelled due to me chickening out. :-)

The topic was:

Is It Unethical to Have Children?

Feel free to comment anyway, if you would like. As before, please be polite and respectful of everyone else.

Interlude from Controversy

Writtenwyrdd has a great post up for How to manage your credit rating, tips for handling junk mail & telemarketers, and do not call lists.

A lot of the information is most useful to Americans, but it's still handy to know what possibilities exist, because your country might have similar safe-guards.

And who doesn't love the idea of sending junk mail back to the sender via their own postage-paid envelopes? *maniacal laughter*

Controversy: Part 2

This is part two of a short series of posts where I'll voice an opinion that might be controversial and then step back and let others react to it.

Please feel free to discuss, argue, agree and disagree in the comments section. All I ask is that everyone to be polite and respectful to everyone else.

~~~~~~~

Could a "Freeware" Model of Sales Work in Publishing?

This post was inspired by a comment made recently by Sarf, and I thank him for the input that led me to consider this question. Here's Sarf's original comment:

I have some questions for your readers.

First the set up:

A person pirates your book by downloading a copy from the web.

They love it. Are you as the author glad or sad?

Now said person writes you a check for the cover price of the book and mails it to you. Do you care if they pirated the book or not?

My (abridged) response to this was:

If I wanted to give it away for free, that's easy to arrange; by trying to get published, it's implied I don't want to give it away for free. I'm not [doing this for attention or praise, so book-love is not enough.]

[As to the question of being paid after the fact,] I want money for my work, but at the same time, I believe I should control whether or not my work is for sale in the first place [thus payment does not erase the ire I feel at having my work taken without my consent].

Sarf is a programmer, so I understand why he's curious about this question. The model he suggests is in keeping with the one "freeware" works under: a computer program is put onto the web for anyone to download, and the creator asks people who like the program to either pay hir† or buy a more powerful non-freeware version of the program.

It's a model worth thinking about, because pirating is something we'll never stamp out, and there's a lot of wisdom to trying to find a system where pirating simply isn't considered a problem. The freeware model views "pirating" to be a way to win customers.

The author Cory Doctorow is buying into this idea. He has said that obscurity is the thing that threatens his livelihood, not piracy, and so he offers some of his books online, for free, and asks people to pay him if they decide they like what they see. To him, he's getting his work read by new people and hopefully winning loyal customers.

I will note that there's not much empirical evidence to suggest this is working, although there's also not much evidence that it's doing Mr. Doctorow any harm. The jury's out.

The last thing I'll note is how music piracy gave way to iTunes. Some people will always steal, but most of us are uncomfortable with that. When the music industry started offering their customers what the customers wanted (the ability to browse for music, the ability to download, the ability to buy one song instead of an entire album) rather than what the industry wanted them to want (the status quo), the public bought into that in a big way. Most of the people downloading music now are paying for it. A few years ago, that wasn't the case.

As eBooks become more popular, the publishing industry should be thinking carefully about what they want the future to hold. Enforcing the status quo could backfire, so thinking flexibly about how books are sold is a worthwhile endeavour.

† "hir" is a gender non-specific way of writing him/her. I like it; I'm usin' it.

~~~~~~~

What do you think? Is piracy theft, and therefore always wrong? Can piracy be harnessed as way to generate sales? Can the freeware model work for publishing? Is there another model that you think would work better? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Controversy: Part 1

I'd like to start some discussions, if I can, and I think the best way to start a discussion is to voice an opinion that might be controversial and then step back and let others react to it.

To that end, this is the first of a short series of posts where I'll do exactly that. I intend to release the posts daily, and I think I'm only going to do three or four for now.

Please feel free to discuss, argue, agree and disagree in the comments section. All I ask is that everyone to be polite and respectful to everyone else.

~~~~~~~

Should Freedom of Speech Have Limits?

As a tween-ager, I decided you should read/listen to everyone's point of view, then make up your own mind. Censorship, i.e. obliterating the words of dissenters, struck me as a bully's tactic, even at that age, although I probably couldn't have put that concept into very eloquent words then.

But here's the ugliest wart on the backside of freedom of speech. Hate-speech.

Hate-speech is at the heart of a contradiction that has always unsettled me. On one hand, I do believe in legally limiting people's ability to disseminate hate-speech. On the other, isn't it hypocritical for me to promote freedom of speech, then turn around and say, "but only up to this point"?

It's something I've long been uncomfortable with, and I only recently sorted out a rationalization that satisfies me. It runs something like this:

Freedom of speech exists to champion and glorify communication. Throughout history, humans have dealt with their differences in many brutal ways, but in our best moments, we deal with them by talking it out. When we speak to one another, we gain understanding, we gain knowledge, we gain tolerance, and sometimes, we even fix our problems. In short, when humans beings talk to one another, we become a society instead of a war-zone. I think that's worth glorifying.

Hate-speech, on the other hand, encourages people to stop talking and start hitting. It seeks to halt communication and prevent understanding. It undermines that which freedom of speech exists in order to promote. Thus, I don't believe hate-speech deserves to be protected under freedom of speech; City Hall should not issue digging permits to people who intend to remove the foundations of the city.

I'll defend someone's right to speak about even abhorrent beliefs, so long as they don't advocate silencing anyone else, including those who disagree with them.

~~~~~~~

What do you think? What limits should freedom of speech have, if any? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Yay! Books!

Yesterday, I bought a book. It wasn't the book I had been considering buying; it was an impulse.

Today, I went to buy the book I originally wanted. Eight other books came home with it.

Y'think I might be set for summer reading material? I may have gone a wee bit overboard, there.

For the record, my new paperback babies are:

- Summer Knight, Death Masks, Blood Rites, Small Favors and Turn Coat, all by Jim Butcher
Yeah, I'm on a binge.

- Odd Hours by Dean Koontz
This was the impulse buy.

- The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown
Because I'm the last person on earth to have not read it, and the peer pressure is just killing me.

- Acacia by David Anthony Durham - Aerin has dibs (see below)
On the strength of the Dynastic Queen's glowing recommendation.

- The Digital Plague by Jeff Somers - Merry has dibs (see below)
Because the only thing scarier than electric monks is Avery Cates.

- The God of Clocks by Alan Campbell - Josh gets dibs, and Sarf gets a copy of Scar Night 'cause he's family! (see below)
This is the writer's third book; his first two were rather jaw-droppingly amazing. This guy arrived on my author-to-watch-for list quite abruptly.

El Husbando chuckled at me when I came in today oohing and ahhing and chortling in anticipation over my latest acquisitions. Laugh now, buddy! You're going to be fighting Jim Butcher for my attention for at least the next month.

~~~~~~~

:-D
So. Anyone else got a book they're particularly excited to be sinking their teeth into?

~~~~~~~

Edit (Free Stuff): Ooh! Aerin gives me a great idea. Since I live in a eensy-weensy apartment and thus donate most of my books to charity once I'm done reading them, would anyone like to volunteer to be the charity this time?

I.e. in the comment section, put dibs on one (1) of the books mentioned above, and once I'm finished reading it, I'll mail it to you, anywhere in the world! Aerin gets first dibs on Acacia, however.

If you get picked to receive a book, I will need you to email your snail mail address to me, but we'll work out the details in the comments section.

Nekkid Wimmen

I'll get to the nekkid wimmen in a moment. But first, my equivalent of Twittering:

~~~~~~~

Dad-blamed, gosh-durned spammers. Grumblegrumble. Hopefully they're gone now, but if not, I may have to change the commenting rules on my blog. Grumblegrump.

~~~~~~~

So... It's been a while, hey? Yeah; I'm a bad blogger.

Truth is, I've been a bit of a naughty writer lately, and I think the dearth of blogging was due to my guilt. I finished a chapter on my WIP, wasn't totally happy with it, decided to take a break while I outlined the next chapter, and WHOOPS. That 'break' expanded into nearly a month of sloth and minimal writing.

Clearly, The Koala needs to blink her red eyes clear, lick the cotton candy off her claws, and do some Goblin-eviscerating.

Um. But I am back in the groove now, so flesh wounds only, please? Whimper.

~~~~~~~

As Sarf noted, spring can make you itchy to do something new (like going to VENICE, omgsojealous...) It has certainly taken me that way. I'm signed up to try yoga, and, two weeks ago, I started going to life drawing sessions again.

For anyone who doesn't know what "life drawing" is, that's a euphemism for drawing nekkid people. Yes, nudey wimmen. Nudey men. Hur, hur.

Except there's not much "hur, hur" about it. The models generally conform to Laman's Law of Public Nudity, which states: "Anytime you see a stranger naked, it is always someone you wish you hadn't seen naked."

The models might be grey-haired grannies, bald forty-year-old men, very overweight women, or creepy young guys with tattoos and pierced...bits.

However, that lack-of-teh-hawt is actually one of the coolest things about life drawing. Once you start sketching, you begin seeing the beauty in people you wouldn't look twice at. You notice the wonderful eyebrows and nose on the bald guy, the lovely flowing lines that define the plump woman's shape. You see the beautiful bone structure on the granny and realize she was gorgeous when she was young, and you spot the elegant musculature on the sketchy, skinny guy with the piercings.

It feels like a gift, every time. The world presents you with a very ordinary person, and you get to see them as a thing of beauty.

It's also weird, of course. I'm still not used to sitting with a bunch of strangers, waiting for a sixty-five-year-old man to whip off his sarong and sling his scrotum over a barstool. All the other artists act so cool. I do too, I guess, so I wonder if I'm the only one in the room who still gets that, "Eek, a penis," reaction.

The "eek" reaction goes away as soon as you start sketching, of course. You're concentrating too hard on what you're doing to feel odd about it. It reminds me of how I used to not be bothered by heights while I was rock climbing. If you're concentrating on your hand and toe placements, and the granite in front of your nose, then the expanse of empty air gaping under your feet doesn't bother you.

And it's kind of the opposite to how I feel about writing a first draft (at least these days.)

While I'm writing it, the story seems like complete drek. I'm pushing onward just to have something on the page, and hissing my mantra, "It's only a first draft," through gritted teeth. Only when I lean back and read it over do I think, "Hey, that's maybe kinda good..."

Is it weird to like editing your work more than actually writing it? You get to enjoy the good bits when you're editing; when you're writing, it seems like you're too busy to notice.

Does anyone else find this to be the case? I'd love to hear what you think.

Mallows, Sans Marsh

I made marshmallows today--from scratch! I am so proud of myself I could just blog.

Once upon a time (when I was teenager-ish aged), I realized I had no idea what marshmallows were. None. I'd been eating them my whole life, but I couldn't have told you any of the ingredients beyond sugar, or by what industrial alchemy they are wrought. To make things worse, I soon realized I also didn't know what mayonnaise was.

As it turns out, sugar is pretty much all there is to marshmallows. Here's the recipe:

Marshmallows

3 cups sugar
1/2 cup water

3 packets plain gelatin (that's about 20 grams, or 3 Tablespoons)
1/2 cup cold water

pinch of salt
1 Tablespoon vanilla extract

Instructions:
- Prepare an 8 x 11 inch pan by greasing it, then dusting it with icing sugar.
- Mix gelatin and 1/2 cup cold water and let it sit for 10 minutes to "bloom".
- Boil sugar and 1/2 cup water together until it reaches 250 degrees Fahrenheit (120 C). For those of you who know the lingo, this is the "hard ball" stage. You need a proper candy thermometer for this.
- Drizzle the hot sugar syrup into the gelatin mixture while beating at a slow speed.
- Once all the sugar syrup is in, add the salt and vanilla extract, then beat at high speed for 12 minutes. The marshmallows will become very thick and gluey by the end.
- Pour the marshmallow goo into the prepared pan and smooth its top with a silicone spatula or greased plastic wrap.
- Allow to cool and set (a few hours), then cut into cubes and dredge the sides with icing sugar until the marshmallows are no longer sticky to the touch.

Makes 20 large marshmallows.

Edit: If you place your mixing bowl on top of a potholder for insulation, it cuts down on the small crunchy sugar crystals mentioned below.

Husbandos and Goblins agree: these taste JUST LIKE STORE-BOUGHT (maybe slightly better.) The mouth-feel and texture are exactly the same also, although my marshmallows have a slight bit of crunch from the sugar that you feel between your teeth. El Husbando actually really likes that.

So...why would someone make marshmallows when it's so easy to just buy a bag? Well, because Goblin is gibbled. Store-bought marshmallows contain corn syrup, and I've got an allergy to corn. Although I can eat the pre-packaged ones with no noticeable consequence, I probably shouldn't. Hence, adventures in mallow-land.

So that was my fun for the day. Has anyone other than Sarf done something quirky and adventurous lately? Tell us about it!

And by the way, mayonnaise is made by beating egg yolks and oil together for a really long time. Who woulda guessed that?

MemeMemeMeme...

A fun meme from Travis Erwin. Play along; you know you want to! (And if your memory's as bad as mine, just make up stuff that's approximately right.)

1. Your rock star name (first pet/current vehicle)
Goldfish Bus
2. Your Gangsta name (favourite ice cream flavour/fave type of shoe)
Vanilla Sneaker
3. Your Native American name (fave colour/favourite animal)
Blue Cat
4. Your soap opera name (middle name/city of birth)
Joan Edmundschuk (this one's fictitious for privacy reasons)
5. Your Star Wars name (first 3 letters of last name/first 2 letters of first name)
Debje
6. Your Superhero name (second fave colour/fave drink)
Red Tang
7. Your NASCAR name (first names of your grandfathers)
Bert Alexandir (Fictitious for privacy reasons; sorry)
8. Your dancer name (favourite scent/fave candy)
Lilac Caramilk
9. TV Weather Anchor name (5th grade teacher/city that starts with the same letter)
Gache Glenlivet (Sheesh--who remembers 5th grade?!)
10. Your spy name (fave season/flower)
Spring Iris
11. Your cartoon name (favourite fruit/article of clothing you are wearing)
Pomegranate Bathrobe
12. Your hippie name (what you had for breakfast/favourite tree)
Nothing Cedar
13. Your porn star name (first pet/first address)
Goldfish Lanky

Studentfail, Queryfail, Agentfail, Zamboni.

It's been Monday all week, I swear.

My apologies for the lack of blogging, but yeef. My students are succumbing to serious end-of-term flakiness. I have scheduled ten make-up labs in the past week, and I had two more students absent today who I haven't heard from yet.

It's my own fault. I am a ginormous softie, and they all know it.

My desk is a-flutter with dubious doctor's notes. Bambi-eyed woe-begones creep into my office to protest their innocent ignorance about the department's (well-advertised) policy of "You ditch a lab, you fail the course". Emails sluice into my inbox, detailing the horrors of abrupt, profound, far-too-icky-to-come-to-school-OMG ailments.

I roar and gnash my teeth and try to put the fear of God the meanie-head Lab Instructor into them, and then I let them do the make-up labs anyway. I am such a sucker.

But I also love my job and my students, even when they're making me nuts. I remember what university was like, and all the complex ways in which anxiety and common sense can tango when there's a project due and a midterm coming up. The kiddies do make me smile. Just not when they're actually in my office, claiming they "overslept" a lab that starts at 2 PM.

Besides, did I mention the meanie-head Lab Instructor can get a lot of writing done while she's over-seeing a make-up lab? I am glad I bought this laptop.

Which brings me, via a typically circuitous route, to #queryfail and Agentfail.

I'd like to comment on these two incidents--or more specifically, some of the comments made in them--from the perspective of someone who makes a living as an instructor.

Dear Writers:
Here's a secret: Teaching is fun. Marking sucks. They don't pay me to teach; they pay me to do the stinkin' marking.

Imagine me hunched at my desk, hemmed in by a box canyon built out of lab books, my fingers cramping around a red pen. I have to get through all those books, and I'm starting to go buggy. The only way I'm going to make it is by taking occasional brain-breaks. I pull back from the canyon, cast a wistful eye at the sunshine outside, and check my email or read a few blogs. Then I get back to work.

Now imagine yourself writing a problematic scene. You grind your teeth and sweat over the words, but it's just not flowing. Finally you stop and play a few games of Minesweeper or computer solitaire. Just a few--and then you get back to the grind.

We all do that, right? Sometimes you just need to clear your head.

So please don't begrudge agents their Twitter and Blogging habits; it's perfectly human to need to take brain-breaks. When you're mired in a task that is tedious as well as depressing or frustrating, sometimes the only thing that gives you the stamina to plough onward for another two hours are those brief, time-wasting breaks. This is true of marking, and writing a tough scene, and it's also true of wading through the slush pile.

PS - And please ease up on the response-time fury. Go re-read my second paragraph; when I get busy at work, I blow off non-crucial things that don't make me money. Agents are allowed to also. Reading the slush pile does not make them money.

Dear Agents:
Here's something you've probably had to explain to a few clients: A writer creates a work, and the public reacts to it. The writer controls the former thing; they do not control the latter. They can write the best damned story they are capable of, but they can't force anyone to like it.

Teaching is similar, in that the outcome is beyond your control. Some students--despite your most strenuous efforts--will never learn enough to pass the course. You have no control over that. You can only teach to the best of your abilities, just as the student can only learn to the best of their abilities.

And yes, it's frustrating when you try your damnedest and it still doesn't work. All teachers groan about and laugh over their students in the staff room. We need to decompress.

However, that's where such discussions have to stay. Ridiculing a student to their face never benefits them. You might de-moralize the student, or make them decide you're jerk not worth listening to, but you won't teach them anything. And your raison d'etre is to teach.

So here's the tough question: How much of #queryfail was an honest attempt to teach, and how much of it was a really fun staff room discussion?

Because if it was the latter, it shouldn't have taken place in front of your "students", the writers. You are absolutely entitled to have as many #queryfail parties as you want and to enjoy the hell out of them. Just make them private--keep it in the staff room.