Theme is my favorite aspect of a novel to think about. I honestly believe that all novels have themes. They might be simple ideas, but themes nonetheless. No matter how “fluffy” or shallow a book may seem, it will have a theme. So what is a theme? It’s the underlying message, the moral if you will, of the story. It’s the reason the author wrote the book, even if she didn’t know she was doing it.
All the events, plot, characters, conflict, POV, etc., feed into the theme. Look at what the author wrote about-- the topics--and what she says about those topics, and you will find the theme. Is she writing about family dynamics? War? Running a business? Running a kingdom? How does the story turn out? The way the plot resolves will give you the clues to find theme.
A theme is a universal idea that the author holds to be true. Most novels have several themes. Short stories may only have one. Poems can have themes, as can songs, photos, paintings, series, dance, etc. It will be stated in universal terms, not in terms of the plot of the particular story. Often they can be stated in proverbs or clichés: beauty is in the eye of the beholder; the ends justify the means; love conquers all; war is hell. It can be stated as a sentence: doing the right thing is often difficult; just because you can doesn’t mean you should; with great power comes great responsibility. It is the idea that the author wants to share with you, the idea that she believes you should also believe.
In the movie “Second Hand Lions,” which if you haven’t seen you should, there is a beautiful scene where Robert Duvall gives Haley Joel Osment part of the speech he gives to all young men. In it the character gives his beliefs and rules of life. Great speech by the way. Within this speech is the theme of the movie, and it isn’t that you should get rich, have adventures, and buy a second hand lion. The theme should never be couched in terms of the plot. The theme is bigger than the plot.
For example, in my next release, THE WISH LIST, I have several themes, ideas that I believe in my worldview. The story is about a CPA in San Diego who finds out she’s next in line to a fairy godmother, and with the onset of her powers, her simple life disappears. One of the themes in my novel is that all gifts have a cost. One might think that suddenly having magic powers would make life easier, but instead she realizes that her new magical gifts come with a responsibility that she never anticipated. But in my own life, I’ve found that gifts do come with a cost. The cost might be minimal--a simple thank you--but more often a gift comes with higher costs. The imagination I have to tell stories, which I consider a gift, also can make me jump to conclusions, or make me incapable of paying attention at times (I go off on tangents too easily--off dreaming somewhere). Another theme of THE WISH LIST is that all decisions have consequences. And also “with great power comes great responsibility.”
Notice that I haven’t used plot to describe any of my themes. I haven’t said, “using a wand can cause trouble.” Plot is not theme. You’re looking for the deeper sense of the story. Harry Potter’s theme is not “a boy wizard fights evil.” That’s plot, not theme. One theme of Harry Potter is “sometimes you have to fight evil, even when you know it will be difficult.” (Dumbledore actually says something like this in the book.) Other Harry Potter themes: sometimes an unlikely hero is the best; friends and family are the greatest treasures; sometimes what’s on the surface doesn’t reveal the true contents; sacrifice can be painful; be true to yourself.
One of the fun ways to find theme is to look for quotes from your novel that stick out, lines that you love. So here are some quotes from my novel:
And in that mix of emotions that swirled through Kristin--the shock, the disbelief, the exasperation--there was a spark of hope, a wish that it all was true. (Sometimes the impossible is possible, never give up hope)
Her wand wasn’t alive exactly, but it seemed to read her thoughts. When her magic wasn’t working, it lay cold and stiff in her hands, but when things were going right, it seemed supple and warm and a graceful extension of her body. And at times, like now, it reminded her of the burden she had inherited. (Every gift has a price)
Tears filled her eyes. “I’ve turned you into a criminal.”
“No, just a rogue.” He grinned at her.
“Count us in as well. We’re rogues too,” said Hyacinth.
“Now have a sandwich, dear.” Rose passed her a sandwich. “Here try this one. It’s turkey and Swiss. Your favorite.”(Sometimes doing the right thing requires breaking the rules.)
So look for your theme. Realize that romances will have a theme and while you will produce one, you don’t have to write specifically toward your theme. Although you can. By the way, the theme for a romance usually isn’t “love is a many splendored thing.”
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
The Innocent Mage by Karen Miller
The Awakened Mage by Karen Miller
Vision in White by Nora Roberts
Bed of Roses by Nora Roberts
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
I Have a Cover!!!
It's here. I have a cover for THE WISH LIST (Tor books, May 2010). I'm so excited.
--Gabi
Inspiration
Wow. All I can say is wow.
May we all experience somehing like this someday.
--Gabi
Books I'm reading now:
The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society by by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows
May we all experience somehing like this someday.
--Gabi
Books I'm reading now:
The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society by by Mary Ann Shaffer and Annie Barrows
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Exceptions
I read The Guide to Literary Agents Editor’s Blog by Chuck Sambuchino today. It was an older post (September 27,2009) on word count. I am neither confused on word count, nor am I looking for a new agent (Love the one I have, thank you very much). But I often like to read the thoughts of publishing professionals on various topics just to learn or get exposed to a different perspective. Mr. Sambuchino said two things that absolutely resonated with me.
The first: “The most important thing here is to realize that there are always exceptions to these rules. And man, people love to point out exceptions - and they always will.”
He of course is talking about writing rules. I love rules--grammar rules, rules of etiquette, rules of writing, rules of behavior, etc. Rules make life easy in a way--you don’t have to think for yourself; you can just do what is expected of you. Do I follow all rules? Not always. I like to think for myself, judge for myself if a rule is fitting or moral or right, but I understand the need for rules and I also understand the need to know the rules. Writing rules exist not because the author isn’t creative enough to produce something without them, but because when a reader picks up a book, the reader has expectations. If a writer refuses to meet those expectations, the writer will be unsuccessful. Breaking those rules comes with a risk, and if a writer breaks those rules, he/she had better know why he/she did so. To break a writing rule, you must understand it first.
Are there exceptions? Of course, but you can’t bank on being an exception. It always surprises me, for example, when I meet an author who doesn’t think that knowing grammar is an essential skill for writing a book. You do. Or when a writer believes that they can include anything in a story (or not change elements, or refuse to listen to critique--not critics, mind you, but critique from editors or agents or trusted readers--and no, I am not arguing in favor of critique groups) because it is their vision and their vision is art and therefore perfect.
The exception gets talked about BECAUSE he/she is an exception. If I tell my students that smoking is bad for them, one will invariably pop up with “Well, my grandfather smoked every day, and he lived to be 95.” Right. He is the exception. We talk about shark attacks and plane crashes because they are the exception. We don’t talk about the millions (yes, millions) who travel each year on an airplane without incident, or the millions (yes, millions) who swim in the ocean and emerge without a nibbled toe. But people will point out the exception and then expect that they too are the exception.
Which leads me to the second quote: “And since most writers haven't earned oodles, they need to stick to the rules and make sure they work gets read. The other thing that will make you an exception is if your writing is absolutely brilliant. But let's face it. Most of our work does not classify as ‘absolutely brilliant’ or we'd all have 16 novels at this point.”
As much I would like to believe I am an extraordinary writer, we have yet to see if my sales record will support that claim. Do I write well? Absolutely. Do I tell a good story? Definitely. Am I brilliant? Of course…in spots. Sometimes my writing blows me away, and then if I look at it again, I see areas I can improve in. Will I be the next big star? God, I hope so, but looking at facts realistically, I write a good book that people can enjoy (yes, I have been told as much). I love the books I write, and I hope to sell enough to establish a career, but to paraphrase Mr. Sambuchino, if most of my work classified as ‘absolutely brilliant’, I’d have 16 novels at this point.
Am I special? You bet your life. There aren’t many who have had a book published, and I number among them. Sometimes that has to be enough.
Next time I’ll talk about Theme and its role in the romance novel. I love the topic of Theme.
--Gabi
The website for the blog is:
http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/Word+Count+For+Novels+And+Childrens+Books+The+Definitive+Post.aspx
Books I’m reading now:
An Affair before Christmas by Eloisa James
A Lady of Persuasion by Tessa Dare
How to Engage an Earl by Kathryn Caskie
Sin and Scandal in England by Melody Thomas
The first: “The most important thing here is to realize that there are always exceptions to these rules. And man, people love to point out exceptions - and they always will.”
He of course is talking about writing rules. I love rules--grammar rules, rules of etiquette, rules of writing, rules of behavior, etc. Rules make life easy in a way--you don’t have to think for yourself; you can just do what is expected of you. Do I follow all rules? Not always. I like to think for myself, judge for myself if a rule is fitting or moral or right, but I understand the need for rules and I also understand the need to know the rules. Writing rules exist not because the author isn’t creative enough to produce something without them, but because when a reader picks up a book, the reader has expectations. If a writer refuses to meet those expectations, the writer will be unsuccessful. Breaking those rules comes with a risk, and if a writer breaks those rules, he/she had better know why he/she did so. To break a writing rule, you must understand it first.
Are there exceptions? Of course, but you can’t bank on being an exception. It always surprises me, for example, when I meet an author who doesn’t think that knowing grammar is an essential skill for writing a book. You do. Or when a writer believes that they can include anything in a story (or not change elements, or refuse to listen to critique--not critics, mind you, but critique from editors or agents or trusted readers--and no, I am not arguing in favor of critique groups) because it is their vision and their vision is art and therefore perfect.
The exception gets talked about BECAUSE he/she is an exception. If I tell my students that smoking is bad for them, one will invariably pop up with “Well, my grandfather smoked every day, and he lived to be 95.” Right. He is the exception. We talk about shark attacks and plane crashes because they are the exception. We don’t talk about the millions (yes, millions) who travel each year on an airplane without incident, or the millions (yes, millions) who swim in the ocean and emerge without a nibbled toe. But people will point out the exception and then expect that they too are the exception.
Which leads me to the second quote: “And since most writers haven't earned oodles, they need to stick to the rules and make sure they work gets read. The other thing that will make you an exception is if your writing is absolutely brilliant. But let's face it. Most of our work does not classify as ‘absolutely brilliant’ or we'd all have 16 novels at this point.”
As much I would like to believe I am an extraordinary writer, we have yet to see if my sales record will support that claim. Do I write well? Absolutely. Do I tell a good story? Definitely. Am I brilliant? Of course…in spots. Sometimes my writing blows me away, and then if I look at it again, I see areas I can improve in. Will I be the next big star? God, I hope so, but looking at facts realistically, I write a good book that people can enjoy (yes, I have been told as much). I love the books I write, and I hope to sell enough to establish a career, but to paraphrase Mr. Sambuchino, if most of my work classified as ‘absolutely brilliant’, I’d have 16 novels at this point.
Am I special? You bet your life. There aren’t many who have had a book published, and I number among them. Sometimes that has to be enough.
Next time I’ll talk about Theme and its role in the romance novel. I love the topic of Theme.
--Gabi
The website for the blog is:
http://www.guidetoliteraryagents.com/blog/Word+Count+For+Novels+And+Childrens+Books+The+Definitive+Post.aspx
Books I’m reading now:
An Affair before Christmas by Eloisa James
A Lady of Persuasion by Tessa Dare
How to Engage an Earl by Kathryn Caskie
Sin and Scandal in England by Melody Thomas
Saturday, October 17, 2009
How to Write a Romance Novel-POV
I’ve finished the second read-through of SPELLBOUND, the second book in the Time of Transition series, and now I’m waiting for the input of my agent and other beta readers before sending it to my editor. I am also eagerly awaiting the cover of my first book, THE WISH LIST. I can’t wait to see what the art department at Tor has come up with.
In the meantime, I’m continuing the series on How to Write a Romance Novel. This post: Point of View. Point of view simply means how the story is told, through whose eyes do we view the novel. Point of view is important because it decides how the reader will experience the story. And many readers have strong opinions on their favorite way to read a story. From now on I’m abbreviating Point of View as POV.
A writer has the choice of several points of view. First person is told from the “I” viewpoint. One character tells his or her story without the ability to know the emotions or feelings of any other character besides themselves. Writing in first person POV can be a challenge, because the author has to convey the emotions and all actions of the non-POV characters through the eyes and experiences of the one main character. First person is common in mystery and urban fantasy. Many fans don’t like first person POV in straight romance, but first person done well will work in any story. (For those of you who love first person POV or write in first person, don’t try to argue with me. I’m just relaying what I’ve heard, not giving my opinion.)
Books aren’t written in second person unless you’re writing a “choose-your-own-adventure” book. Second person is “you.” Try and see. “You are walking down a street. You see a handsome stranger leaning in a doorway. You smile at him.” I will offer an opinion here. A book written in second person would be annoying.
Third person is the most common choice for fiction., but even here you have choices. You can use omniscient, where the reader is privy to every character’s thoughts. Omniscient is rarely used today. Limited third is most common, where the reader experiences the novel through the eyes of just a few characters. In a romance, limited third is often limited to the hero and heroine.
So that’s the technical explanation of POV. But, wait, there’s more. Many authors don’t handle POV well. The problem occurs when the author tries to give information that the POV character couldn’t possibly have or wouldn’t ever think. I can’t tell you the number of times I have read something like, “She tossed her long, silky, blond hair over her shoulder. Her long, slim legs were curved just the way a man liked, and her cute figure did the same,” while in the heroine’s POV. The heroine wouldn’t think of herself in these terms unless she is arrogant and conceited. And the heroine very well might be, in which case, go right ahead, but be aware of the POV pitfalls.
POV is the main tool you use to pull the reader into the character’s brain. We need to experience their thoughts, their feelings, their reactions. Once you achieve placing the reader in the character’s mind, you switch to deep POV. You don’t want to use terms like “she felt” or “she thought”. Their thought is the reader’s thought at this point; you don’t have to introduce it. Also at this point you shouldn’t refer to the character by name unless it is grammatically necessary. A character wouldn’t refer to themselves by his own name. Switching out of deep POV happens by accident or when other characters enter the scene or at scene breaks or, or, or (yes, I wrote “or” three times), but once it is established it is easy to reenter that state.
In the course of writing you will also hear the term “head-hopping.” Head hopping is jumping from one character’s POV into another’s at a rapid pace. Most readers don’t know enough about POV to realize when it happens, but they might feel some dissatisfaction with a scene or a book because of it. They won’t feel as drawn to the characters; this is because they haven’t had a chance to live in the character’s head for long enough to identify with him or her. Staying in one character’s POV gives the reader the chance to know and understand the hero or heroine. Purists (authors who believe in the strict adherence to the POV rule) will tell you to stay in one character’s head for an entire scene or longer. Non-purists will switch when they wish. You have to decide for yourself how you will write. I tend to write from one POV for a scene or chapter, but I will change when I need to. I have enjoyed books by Purists and non-purists, but I do tend to notice the rapid POV change, and I have also gotten annoyed unless it is masterfully done.
One last thing about limited third: to help build the page-turning capacity of your book, think about putting the scene into the POV of the character who has the most to lose.
All writing rules are meant to be broken. One of the newest trends is to write the heroine in first person and other characters in third. So, study the books you enjoy and examine the author’s use of POV. Then choose your POV and keep writing.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Knight of Desire by Margaret Mallery
Never Trust a Scoundrel by Gaye Callen
How I Write: Secrets of a Bestselling Author by Janet Evanovich and Ina Yalof
In the meantime, I’m continuing the series on How to Write a Romance Novel. This post: Point of View. Point of view simply means how the story is told, through whose eyes do we view the novel. Point of view is important because it decides how the reader will experience the story. And many readers have strong opinions on their favorite way to read a story. From now on I’m abbreviating Point of View as POV.
A writer has the choice of several points of view. First person is told from the “I” viewpoint. One character tells his or her story without the ability to know the emotions or feelings of any other character besides themselves. Writing in first person POV can be a challenge, because the author has to convey the emotions and all actions of the non-POV characters through the eyes and experiences of the one main character. First person is common in mystery and urban fantasy. Many fans don’t like first person POV in straight romance, but first person done well will work in any story. (For those of you who love first person POV or write in first person, don’t try to argue with me. I’m just relaying what I’ve heard, not giving my opinion.)
Books aren’t written in second person unless you’re writing a “choose-your-own-adventure” book. Second person is “you.” Try and see. “You are walking down a street. You see a handsome stranger leaning in a doorway. You smile at him.” I will offer an opinion here. A book written in second person would be annoying.
Third person is the most common choice for fiction., but even here you have choices. You can use omniscient, where the reader is privy to every character’s thoughts. Omniscient is rarely used today. Limited third is most common, where the reader experiences the novel through the eyes of just a few characters. In a romance, limited third is often limited to the hero and heroine.
So that’s the technical explanation of POV. But, wait, there’s more. Many authors don’t handle POV well. The problem occurs when the author tries to give information that the POV character couldn’t possibly have or wouldn’t ever think. I can’t tell you the number of times I have read something like, “She tossed her long, silky, blond hair over her shoulder. Her long, slim legs were curved just the way a man liked, and her cute figure did the same,” while in the heroine’s POV. The heroine wouldn’t think of herself in these terms unless she is arrogant and conceited. And the heroine very well might be, in which case, go right ahead, but be aware of the POV pitfalls.
POV is the main tool you use to pull the reader into the character’s brain. We need to experience their thoughts, their feelings, their reactions. Once you achieve placing the reader in the character’s mind, you switch to deep POV. You don’t want to use terms like “she felt” or “she thought”. Their thought is the reader’s thought at this point; you don’t have to introduce it. Also at this point you shouldn’t refer to the character by name unless it is grammatically necessary. A character wouldn’t refer to themselves by his own name. Switching out of deep POV happens by accident or when other characters enter the scene or at scene breaks or, or, or (yes, I wrote “or” three times), but once it is established it is easy to reenter that state.
In the course of writing you will also hear the term “head-hopping.” Head hopping is jumping from one character’s POV into another’s at a rapid pace. Most readers don’t know enough about POV to realize when it happens, but they might feel some dissatisfaction with a scene or a book because of it. They won’t feel as drawn to the characters; this is because they haven’t had a chance to live in the character’s head for long enough to identify with him or her. Staying in one character’s POV gives the reader the chance to know and understand the hero or heroine. Purists (authors who believe in the strict adherence to the POV rule) will tell you to stay in one character’s head for an entire scene or longer. Non-purists will switch when they wish. You have to decide for yourself how you will write. I tend to write from one POV for a scene or chapter, but I will change when I need to. I have enjoyed books by Purists and non-purists, but I do tend to notice the rapid POV change, and I have also gotten annoyed unless it is masterfully done.
One last thing about limited third: to help build the page-turning capacity of your book, think about putting the scene into the POV of the character who has the most to lose.
All writing rules are meant to be broken. One of the newest trends is to write the heroine in first person and other characters in third. So, study the books you enjoy and examine the author’s use of POV. Then choose your POV and keep writing.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Knight of Desire by Margaret Mallery
Never Trust a Scoundrel by Gaye Callen
How I Write: Secrets of a Bestselling Author by Janet Evanovich and Ina Yalof
Thursday, October 1, 2009
How to Write a Romance Novel--Plot (and Conflict)
Sorry I’m late. The good news is that I finished both the copy edits for THE WISH LIST, my May release, and the second book in my series, SPELLBOUND, and got it out to my beta readers. The bad news is that this blog was one of the things I have to set aside for a few days. But I’m back now, and trying to catch up.
Plot is up next. Picture if you will (Rod Serling, just kidding) a five or six year-old, hmmm, let’s make her a little girl (only because I didn’t have any boys, and I’ll have an easier time imagining it). Ask this little girl about a movie she saw, let’s say FINDING NEMO, and she’ll happily recount the film: “There’s a mom and dad fish and a barracuda eats the mom and all the babies, but there’s one left and he has a bad flipper, and his dad won’t let him do anything, so he swims to a boat, when a diver comes and scoops him into a bag. The dad chases the boat and…”
You get the picture. That’s what plot is--what happens. Nothing more, nothing less. I’m one of those readers who prefers plot over characterization, and I know I’m in the minority among romance readers. Don’t get me wrong; a book needs characters and their problems, but I like plot--what happens next. The number one reason I put down a book is because the characters have so much baggage, I can’t believe they can get to a happy end without a porter, a luggage cart, and an account with UPS. (But I will defend your right to read such novels--hey, you have your own taste.)
Now the controversial part. I think conflict belongs under plot, not characterization. In all honesty no one element can be truly separated out from the others. Characterization is a part of plot, and conflict is a part of characterization. But conflict drives the plot. Conflict and the way your characters react and respond to the conflict tells the story--the plot. It sets the story in motion.
There are two types of conflict: internal and external. Internal conflict is the struggle within one’s self. Any decision a person makes can constitute an internal conflict. Recovering from pain, changing one’s image, maintaining one’s temper, and resisting an urge are all possible internal conflicts. As the name implies, an internal conflict takes places within one character, and no other character will share the conflict unless the original character chooses to share the conflict. External conflict is any struggle with forces outside oneself. War, weather, fights, competing in a beauty pageant can all lead to possible external conflicts.
There are four kinds of conflict: Character vs. Character; Character vs. Circumstance; Character vs. Society; and Character vs. Himself. The first is a physical conflict; it requires a test of strength against other men, forces of nature, or even animals. The second is also known as the classical struggle, a fight against fate, the gods, or the circumstances of life, like aging (Don’t get me started--my knees will never be young again). The third is a struggle against the ideas or customs of other people. And the last is psychological--the character struggles with himself, with his own soul, ideas of right and wrong, physical limitation, choices, etc. (Sound familiar? Look above at internal conflict.)
Here I am going out on another limb: I believe every book should have both types of conflict. Internal conflict alone leaves me cold. External conflict alone doesn’t leave much room for character growth or change. (See, I told you all these elements are interconnected.)
Conflict is a highly complex idea. I will revisit it later in this series, but until then, I hope I gave you something new to think about.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Goddess of the Hunt by Tessa Dare
A Hint of Wicked by Jennifer Haymore
Suddenly One Summer by Barbara Freethy
Plot is up next. Picture if you will (Rod Serling, just kidding) a five or six year-old, hmmm, let’s make her a little girl (only because I didn’t have any boys, and I’ll have an easier time imagining it). Ask this little girl about a movie she saw, let’s say FINDING NEMO, and she’ll happily recount the film: “There’s a mom and dad fish and a barracuda eats the mom and all the babies, but there’s one left and he has a bad flipper, and his dad won’t let him do anything, so he swims to a boat, when a diver comes and scoops him into a bag. The dad chases the boat and…”
You get the picture. That’s what plot is--what happens. Nothing more, nothing less. I’m one of those readers who prefers plot over characterization, and I know I’m in the minority among romance readers. Don’t get me wrong; a book needs characters and their problems, but I like plot--what happens next. The number one reason I put down a book is because the characters have so much baggage, I can’t believe they can get to a happy end without a porter, a luggage cart, and an account with UPS. (But I will defend your right to read such novels--hey, you have your own taste.)
Now the controversial part. I think conflict belongs under plot, not characterization. In all honesty no one element can be truly separated out from the others. Characterization is a part of plot, and conflict is a part of characterization. But conflict drives the plot. Conflict and the way your characters react and respond to the conflict tells the story--the plot. It sets the story in motion.
There are two types of conflict: internal and external. Internal conflict is the struggle within one’s self. Any decision a person makes can constitute an internal conflict. Recovering from pain, changing one’s image, maintaining one’s temper, and resisting an urge are all possible internal conflicts. As the name implies, an internal conflict takes places within one character, and no other character will share the conflict unless the original character chooses to share the conflict. External conflict is any struggle with forces outside oneself. War, weather, fights, competing in a beauty pageant can all lead to possible external conflicts.
There are four kinds of conflict: Character vs. Character; Character vs. Circumstance; Character vs. Society; and Character vs. Himself. The first is a physical conflict; it requires a test of strength against other men, forces of nature, or even animals. The second is also known as the classical struggle, a fight against fate, the gods, or the circumstances of life, like aging (Don’t get me started--my knees will never be young again). The third is a struggle against the ideas or customs of other people. And the last is psychological--the character struggles with himself, with his own soul, ideas of right and wrong, physical limitation, choices, etc. (Sound familiar? Look above at internal conflict.)
Here I am going out on another limb: I believe every book should have both types of conflict. Internal conflict alone leaves me cold. External conflict alone doesn’t leave much room for character growth or change. (See, I told you all these elements are interconnected.)
Conflict is a highly complex idea. I will revisit it later in this series, but until then, I hope I gave you something new to think about.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Goddess of the Hunt by Tessa Dare
A Hint of Wicked by Jennifer Haymore
Suddenly One Summer by Barbara Freethy
Sunday, September 20, 2009
How to Write a Romance Novel-Characters
Good God, where does one start? Characters are the lifeblood of a novel. You must have them or a novel cannot exist. Think about it. Even if you’re writing about the wind, the wind itself becomes a character. You cannot write a novel without them or at least him (or her). Otherwise you’re not telling a story but just trying to prove that you’re clever. I’d call that pretentious. And obnoxious.
The reader wants to relate to the story you’re trying to tell, and the way the reader accomplishes that is through the characters. Gosh, but where to go from here? OK, a quick generalization: you must make your main characters--that is your hero and heroine in a romance--likable. Or at least have the hope of becoming likable by the end. Because the main character, especially the heroine (let’s face it, most of our novels are read by women), is the vessel through which the reader experiences the novel. If the reader cannot identify with or recognize themselves in or understand or just plain admire your main characters, what reason do they have to finish your novel?
Unfortunately likability is hard to define. Personally I like egg-head characters, the absent-minded professor types. I even wrote one, only to have a reviewer give me a bad review because she hates that kind of person. As is her right. We have our own personal tastes, our own criteria for choosing friends and lovers. Good thing too. Otherwise there would be very few happily married couples out there.
But likability itself isn’t necessarily the factor that makes a novel successful. Take Scarlett O’Hara. Yes, she has traits we can admire, but I wouldn’t want her as friend. And yet GWTW is great because of Scarlett. And if you another example of where likability plays a contrary role in characterization, read THE MURDER OF ROGER ACKROYD by Agatha Christie. I won’t say anything else about the novel except that she was both reviled and praised for this novel, and she changed the mystery genre forever with this book.
Character is the person doing the actions; characterization is the traits given to that person. You must focus on the characterization to make rounded, well-formed characters. Just by nature of the beast, a fictional character cannot have as many facets as real person (such a feat, I propose, is an impossibility), but your characters should have enough sides to bring him/her to life in a novel, to let your reader believe they could be reading about a real person. They must be three dimensional, not static; they should grow during the course of the novel (ask yourself, “What have they learned?”); they should have faults. Ack, don’t make your characters perfect. Perfection is not only unbelievable, but it can also come off as arrogant, and often boring. Really. If your characters are perfect, they don’t make mistakes. And then where’s your conflict? (That’s next week, folks).
You can, of course, chart out each of your characters: what is their eye color, hair color, height, etc (always useful if you need to refer to them through out the book, and you will, and don’t wish to have your heroine change from having blue eyes in one scene to having green in the next). You can ascribe an entire history to them: where they attended school, what traumas affected their childhoods, what their favorite Christmas present was; etc.; stuff that may never appear in your book, but might help you understand your character better. You can find character interviews all over the Internet. Whatever helps you to create characters that come alive is what you need to use.
And we can’t forget the other characters in your book, namely the villain and the secondary characters. You should take as much time making your villain realistic as your main characters. Or almost. Personally I like the over-the-top villain: the Voldemorts, the Darth Vaders, the Wicked Witches of the West. But even these characters were given some sort of backstory to make their evil understandable. Heck, the Wicked Witch was given her own book(1) and Darth was given three whole movies(2). And if you’re anything like I am, your secondary characters take on a life of their own. I literally had to kick one of my characters off an island because she was taking over the book. I love secondary characters. Think of them as the character actors. So often they steal the scene from the leads. Like Spike in NOTTING HILL or Alfred in the Dark Knight.
One last little thing: it’s fun to give your characters a quirk to set them apart, be that a fear, a habit, some odd little hobby that makes your readers smile or at least remember your characters. Everybody knows and remembers that Indiana Jones is afraid of snakes, that Ron Weasley hates spiders. In my upcoming story, THE WISH LIST (May 2010), my heroine eats chocolate chipless cookies--that’s right, chocolate chip cookies without chocolate chips.
There is so much more to characters than what I possibly can write in a blog. So go explore on your own. Find out what you want your characters to do and learn. Give them personality and faults. And don’t forget to let them fall in love. You are writing a romance, after all.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Desperate Duchesses by Eloisa James
The Highwayman by Michele Hauf
What Happens in London by Julia Quinn
1 In the original book, the Witch is chasing Dorothy because she murdered her sister and now she wants the silver slippers, not a very original reason, but a reason nonetheless ; the book WICKED followed decades after the original and gave a whole new history to the Wicked Witch. I’ll let you decide if Maguire succeeded.
2 The supposed “first three” episodes of STAR WARS are all backstory. I won’t give my over opinion here, but we as writers know what too much backstory does to a novel. And I love STAR WARS (the original three).
The reader wants to relate to the story you’re trying to tell, and the way the reader accomplishes that is through the characters. Gosh, but where to go from here? OK, a quick generalization: you must make your main characters--that is your hero and heroine in a romance--likable. Or at least have the hope of becoming likable by the end. Because the main character, especially the heroine (let’s face it, most of our novels are read by women), is the vessel through which the reader experiences the novel. If the reader cannot identify with or recognize themselves in or understand or just plain admire your main characters, what reason do they have to finish your novel?
Unfortunately likability is hard to define. Personally I like egg-head characters, the absent-minded professor types. I even wrote one, only to have a reviewer give me a bad review because she hates that kind of person. As is her right. We have our own personal tastes, our own criteria for choosing friends and lovers. Good thing too. Otherwise there would be very few happily married couples out there.
But likability itself isn’t necessarily the factor that makes a novel successful. Take Scarlett O’Hara. Yes, she has traits we can admire, but I wouldn’t want her as friend. And yet GWTW is great because of Scarlett. And if you another example of where likability plays a contrary role in characterization, read THE MURDER OF ROGER ACKROYD by Agatha Christie. I won’t say anything else about the novel except that she was both reviled and praised for this novel, and she changed the mystery genre forever with this book.
Character is the person doing the actions; characterization is the traits given to that person. You must focus on the characterization to make rounded, well-formed characters. Just by nature of the beast, a fictional character cannot have as many facets as real person (such a feat, I propose, is an impossibility), but your characters should have enough sides to bring him/her to life in a novel, to let your reader believe they could be reading about a real person. They must be three dimensional, not static; they should grow during the course of the novel (ask yourself, “What have they learned?”); they should have faults. Ack, don’t make your characters perfect. Perfection is not only unbelievable, but it can also come off as arrogant, and often boring. Really. If your characters are perfect, they don’t make mistakes. And then where’s your conflict? (That’s next week, folks).
You can, of course, chart out each of your characters: what is their eye color, hair color, height, etc (always useful if you need to refer to them through out the book, and you will, and don’t wish to have your heroine change from having blue eyes in one scene to having green in the next). You can ascribe an entire history to them: where they attended school, what traumas affected their childhoods, what their favorite Christmas present was; etc.; stuff that may never appear in your book, but might help you understand your character better. You can find character interviews all over the Internet. Whatever helps you to create characters that come alive is what you need to use.
And we can’t forget the other characters in your book, namely the villain and the secondary characters. You should take as much time making your villain realistic as your main characters. Or almost. Personally I like the over-the-top villain: the Voldemorts, the Darth Vaders, the Wicked Witches of the West. But even these characters were given some sort of backstory to make their evil understandable. Heck, the Wicked Witch was given her own book(1) and Darth was given three whole movies(2). And if you’re anything like I am, your secondary characters take on a life of their own. I literally had to kick one of my characters off an island because she was taking over the book. I love secondary characters. Think of them as the character actors. So often they steal the scene from the leads. Like Spike in NOTTING HILL or Alfred in the Dark Knight.
One last little thing: it’s fun to give your characters a quirk to set them apart, be that a fear, a habit, some odd little hobby that makes your readers smile or at least remember your characters. Everybody knows and remembers that Indiana Jones is afraid of snakes, that Ron Weasley hates spiders. In my upcoming story, THE WISH LIST (May 2010), my heroine eats chocolate chipless cookies--that’s right, chocolate chip cookies without chocolate chips.
There is so much more to characters than what I possibly can write in a blog. So go explore on your own. Find out what you want your characters to do and learn. Give them personality and faults. And don’t forget to let them fall in love. You are writing a romance, after all.
--Gabi
Books I’m reading now:
Desperate Duchesses by Eloisa James
The Highwayman by Michele Hauf
What Happens in London by Julia Quinn
1 In the original book, the Witch is chasing Dorothy because she murdered her sister and now she wants the silver slippers, not a very original reason, but a reason nonetheless ; the book WICKED followed decades after the original and gave a whole new history to the Wicked Witch. I’ll let you decide if Maguire succeeded.
2 The supposed “first three” episodes of STAR WARS are all backstory. I won’t give my over opinion here, but we as writers know what too much backstory does to a novel. And I love STAR WARS (the original three).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
