Review: Persuasion by Jane Austen

Persuasion by Jane Austen

My rating: 5 of 5 stars



I read this as part of Roof Beam Reader's Austen in August event. I'd been planning to read it for some time, but the literary event gave me an excuse to.

This was Jane Austen's last completed novel, and, some say, gave her own story a happy ending. I can't comment on that part, because I didn't hire a medium before writing my review, and I think it's problematic to assume books are closely tied to an author's personal life.

The book tells the story of Anne Elliot, 27 years old and unmarried. She's quiet and kind and reserved, which is why her selfish sister and father basically ignore her. Eight years before, she was engaged to Frederick Wentworth, but let herself be persuaded by her friend, Lady Russell, to break off the engagement because Frederick had no money or family connections.

At the story's start, their positions are reversed. He's a Captain in the Royal Navy, and has won a lot of money for his naval success. Her father, meanwhile, has frittered away his money, and has to rent out his family home to make ends meet, which he'd rather do than live frugally for the next 8 years.

Anne stays with her sister, Mary, for a while, before heading out to join her father and sister in Bath. This gives her a chance to reacquaint herself with Frederick Wentworth, and for him to realize she's still worthy of loving. When he follows her to Bath, it can be only for one reason, but first social dictates of politeness and proper channels stand in their way.

The climax of the book comes with Anne talking to one of Frederick's friends about women remaining constantly in love moreso than men (and dismissing books written by men about woman's inconstancy, in a speech that made me grin), which Frederick overhears. His hope is renewed, and he sends her a letter confessing he still loves her, and will find a way to get her answer. She frets, but ultimately bumps into him, and they're able to discuss their feelings openly for the first time all book.

Supposedly, Austen didn't have as much time to polish this manuscript as she did others, because she came down with the illness that killed her while she was writing this. Still, I didn't see that the book suffered much for it. I thought the narrative tension was tighter in this book, and the plot moved faster. The ending takes place over a couple of days. Anne keeps trying to talk to people about important things, but keeps missing her chance, for one reason or another. Just when she thinks it's safe to bring up sensitive matters, her younger sister and her whole family shows up to complicate everything.

The stakes are also higher in this book. One young woman sustains head trauma, another is crippled and financially ruined thanks to another character, and the family estate stands to risk demolishing, if one selfish, two-faced cousin gets his way. Anne is sweet and even-tempered, but it's her calmness in the face of crisis that serves her best in this narrative, because there's regularly something to panic about. Austen makes the events noteworthy not by sending her protagonist into a tizzy, but by riling up everyone around her.

There is, of course, the signature Austen wit, the comments on manners and society, and the subtle digs throughout. Most of them are about vanity and hypochondria, but there's also some very subtle hints of what Austen thinks of Bath, which is sort of a resort spa, at least in Austen's time.

I read this book on audio, narrated by Juliet Stevenson. Stevenson has a lovely voice, and she reads clearly with a consistent volume. I kept up my motivation on long walks listening to this, and it was Stevenson's lively narration as much as Austen's words that kept me going.

I think this is my favorite Jane Austen book. If you're thinking of reading Jane Austen (and this August is a great time to hop on board), you could do well to pick this one up. The first couple of chapters are a bit info-dumpy, but the story that follows makes it perfectly forgivable.



View all my reviews

The Importance of Good Grammar

Back in January, I posted about why I consider grammar to be important. Since then, I've learned that there's a term for me (well, a nicer one than the usual). I'm a grammar prescriptivist. That takes away the implication that I go around berating people about their grammar mistakes (I don't), while making me sound all smart and stuff.

There was a recent post on the Harvard Business Review, written by the CEO of iFixit. He won't hire people with poor grammar, and his reasoning is sound, to me. In today's employer's market, he could have any justification he wanted for refusing to hire the people he doesn't want working for him, within legally protected limits. But I can't find fault in his assumption that those who pay attention to grammar also pay attention to other small details. Detail-oriented people are the ones he wants working for him.

At work, I'm the detail person. I'm the one who proofreads emails and cover letters, looks over monthly billing for errors (which I used to do more formally), is in charge of the most exacting paperwork, and who people snag for some picky little error in one of the computer programs we have to use.

Outside of work, my detail orientation isn't appreciated. My family and friends throw up their hands in exasperation if I correct them, and I read regular screeds online about how "GRAMUR DUSNT MATER."

I do recognize the value of descriptivism (basically, the notion that it doesn't matter, so long as the intent was communicated). I also think attention to grammar and spelling show a level of respect I prefer in those I wish to communicate with. I don't expect my friends to speak in full, grammatically correct sentences, but I do expect their posts to contain the right version of "its" in enough of their posts that I know they know the difference (and they can blame autocorrect for the rest). If I think they don't, I'll try to gently point it out.

With writing, all you have is your words. You don't know my expression right now, or in what tone I'd speak this post, or how much sleep I got last night. (Not a lot; thanks for asking.) The words are devoid of context.  They're your only link to the person reading those words.

And call it snobbish, call it elitist, call me full of myself, but bad spelling and consistently poor grammar say a lot about your education and intelligence. If a person can see at a glance that you lack the ability to learn a set of rules and follow it, why should they trust anything you have to say?

The importance of grammar applies whether you're typing comments on a blog post or submitting to an agent's slush pile. If you honestly don't care how others perceive you, then you can feel free to ignore any and all rules. But, if you want to come across as well-educated or publishable, I recommend you read up on the rules.

Review: Chomp by Carl Hiaasen

Chomp by Carl Hiaasen

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



Carl Hiaasen started out writing for newspapers, then he wrote some gritty tales with dark humor, and now he's writing YA. It seemed like an odd transition to me then, and his previous attempts (Hoot, Flush, and Scat) have seemed a bit cutesy. With this one, though, it feels like he's finally comfortable writing for a preteen audience, and he winds up with an entertaining tale about the illusion of reality TV, and how nature is pretty but mean.

In Chomp, Mickey Cray takes a job, through his son, Wahoo, working for a reality nature show with a Steve Irwin wannabe. Derek Badger (not his real name) is stupid and clumsy, and his impressive survivalist stunts are entirely staged. The Crays own a property with a lot of tamed wildlife, the showcase of which is a 12-foot alligator named Alice.

I've read a lot of books with characters who share my name, by the way. This is the first literary Alice I've liked without reservation.

Derek Badger gets it into his head that he wants to go out into the Everglades and meet wild animals to add a level of realism to the show, after Alice nearly drowns him for trying to ride her like a pony. (That is not a euphemism. This is YA.)

Of course, this goes disastrously, and the TV crew is transformed into a search party in due time. Meanwhile, Wahoo brings with him a friend named Tuna, whose drunkard father slogs out with a gun to collect his daughter.

The book moves at a good clip, and there are several plot threads running throughout that tighten the tension. I cared what happened to these characters, even the doofuses, and I wondered if Hiaasen was dark enough to kill off good guys in a YA.

This is the first YA I've read in a while that felt like it was set today, with real characters. The cultural references were current, and they sounded natural coming out of the characters' mouths. Adults are clueless about the utility of cellphones, but the kids text like crazy, use Skype, and google up the scientific names for animals. Maybe it'll seem dated in another few years, but it added a touch of realism I really enjoyed.

The characters are all unique to this book, but they're still Carl Hiaasen staples. Mickey Cray plays the heroic nutcase, Derek Badger plays the big dope who's in over his head, Jared Gordon plays the dangerous lunatic, and Wahoo Cray and Tuna Gordon play the plucky kids necessary to call this YA. They're all interesting characters, for the most part, and most of them have a back story and motivations beyond making people's lives more complicated. The scenes where Mickey Cray undermines Derek Badger while barely lifting a finger are some of the most amusing.

Overall, I felt like Hiaasen finally has this whole YA thing figured out, with this book.

A note about the edition: I listened to this on audio, with James Van Der Beek narrating. While there were places I found his delivery a little strange, for the most part, I found his voice soothing and melodic. He should read more audio books.



View all my reviews

Recap for July 2012

My blog hits continue to grow. Here in the anniversary month of my blog, I just fell short of 3,000 hits. I know a lot of you will chuckle and think, How cute, but for me, it's an accomplishment.

Onto the recap:

Book Reviews
Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me? by Mindy Kaling (3/5 stars; humorous memoir)—A writer for The Office (American edition) writes about what brought her to her current status. Has its moments in Kaling's self-deprecating, often ironic humor, but lacks a narrative thread or theme to tie it together.

Ashes and Wine by Taryn Elliott (5/5 stars; romance with tragic elements)—That the author is in my writing group has nothing to do with my high rating. She earned all five of those stars with a heart-wrenching tale of love in a time of loss.

The Ultimate David Sedaris Audio Collection by David Sedaris (4/5 stars; humorous memoir; audio)—I reviewed all of the books within the collection separately, because they're a bit much, taken as a whole. Those individual links are all within the above review. David Sedaris is a gay man with OCD, and he recounts vignettes of his life with a darkly humorous twist. Mostly, the laugh is on him. The entire set can be overwhelming for a newbie like me, but I do recommend the various parts.

The Magicians by Lev Grossman (2/5 stars; magical realism; read as part of Twitter's #1book140)—Self-involved high school student goes to an institute of higher learning devoted to magic. Wastes it. Too bogged down in literary trappings to let the wondrous parts of the story breathe.

Succubus Blues by Richelle Mead (4/5 stars; urban fantasy)—Succubus Georgina Kincaid lives in Seattle, meets her favorite author, longs for a normal relationship, and looks into the deaths of local supernaturals, who aren't supposed to be able to die. Surprisingly deep, and very readable.

The Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood (4/5 stars; feminist literary fiction; audio)—Iris Chase Griffen recounts her early life, in a story within a story with a story framework. Lovely and touching, yet not my favorite Atwood book.

Fighting Gravity by Leah Petersen (3/5 stars; science fiction M/M romance; received a review copy)—This debut novel shows a lot of promise, but leaves too many questions I felt could've been answered, and grammar editing was shoddy. Interested in seeing what's next for this author.

Aesop's Fables (4/5 stars; classic in the Greek sense of the word)—I'd never read all of the fables, so paging through a collection whenever I was between projects was fun. Surprising how relevant some of the lessons still are.

Most Popular Posts in July
Grammar: Hyphen Use continued to draw a lot of people to my blog.

A post on why I read audio books drew a few readers my way.

Grammar Peeves: Filler was about filler words that waste time in the narrative, and apparently a lot of people wanted to know more.

My progress post that discussed my new project had more than a few curious readers.

Grammar Peeves: Homonyms discussed how words that sound alike can trip up any author, and I included a list, as well as a suggestion of how to deal with them.

I'm skipping over a link for my giveaway, because that ended a month ago. All of the winners should've received their books by now.

I posted about how many characters a story may need, and how to deal with a surplus. That was posted in June, but people didn't discover it until July, evidently.

My review of 11/22/63 went up way back in January, but that's still generating interest. Search inquiries ask about "The Murder Place," the yellow card man, or references to It or Christine. I'm glad people are finding my post, because I do mention those things, if not in the review, then in my posts about the readalong I participated in that month.

Editing: Where to Start is the beginning of a sometimes series, and the fact that it did fairly well in hits encourages me to continue.

My post on fanfic did pretty well for itself.

And I told some secrets about how writers research things to make their writing more real, which several of you wanted to know about.

Next month: more posts on editing, some Austen in August posts (event hosted by Roof Beam Reader), and your regularly-scheduled blathering. Hope your August is awesome, pantsters!

Review: Aesop's Fables; a new translation

Aesop's Fables; a new translation by Aesop

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



I'd heard a lot of Aesop's fables, here and there, but I'd never read them all. There are a lot, it turns out, and most are fewer than 100 words long.

They all have similar elements, but these elements aren't there in all of them. Sometimes animals stand in for human traits (like the fox almost always represents cleverness, the lion danger and strength, the wolf is sneaky and scary, the crow a big dope, the monkey cute and clever), but some of the stories have only human characters. The stories don't even all have explicit lessons at the end; sometimes it's spoken by a character in the fable.

The most interesting part of reading these fables is that the lessons at the end have become clichés in our time (and probably before then, too), and the stories were written in the 7th century BC. Some are timeless, but surely some attitudes have updated since then. I refer to the two that were explicitly sexist, and the many that implied that slavery is a normal, everyday thing.

My favorite fable, which I've never heard before, is about wolves who complain to the sheep that they're not given the chance, because the dogs bark and bite and chase them off when they try to get close. The sheep get rid of the dogs, and are torn to pieces for their stupidity. It reminded me of the tone argument, the precept that one needs to be nice about it when pointing out others' prejudices.

Most of the stories can likely be similarly updated, because the lesson isn't always explicit. It may well have been meant for one situation, but its universal application is what's made it survive this long.

The end of the edition I read contained some biographical information about Aesop, which adds some more context to these tales. It doesn't address any of the controversy about his identity, but presents the story of his probable life at Samos and death at Delphi.

If you think you know the fables, I recommend you read through them, at some point, to get a more full view. If nothing else, they're useful as cultural reference to a place and time when people still feared wolves.



View all my reviews

Review: Fighting Gravity by Leah Petersen

Fighting Gravity by Leah Petersen

My rating: 3 of 5 stars



I received a review copy of this book from the author. I'm afraid I'm about to prove that not having to pay for a book doesn't bias me in its favor.

There were some really strong parts of this book. The middle section is a tense page-turner, and I found the characters well-developed. But the first section, before the introduction of the Emperor, and the last couple of chapters, sagged. The worldbuilding was good, except that I had questions about the world I felt could've been answered in the narrative.

The story follows Jacob Dawes, an "unclass" boy from one of the worst slums in Mexico. He's recruited into a prestigious academy in an unprecedented move. Unclass people don't just go to the IIC, apparently, and Jacob pays for it in unjust punishment by his teachers and the head of the academy.

Then he makes a scientific breakthrough, and suddenly everyone respects him. There's an implication his edge is that he has a convenient form of synesthesia, which allows him to see patterns that others are blind to. If that's the case, though, it wasn't fleshed out or consistent enough, leading me to the uncomfortable feeling I was dealing with a Gary Stu.

The book improves after the introduction of the Emperor, but there were more questions. I could never figure out if the Emperor was a mere figurehead, a symbol of a united galaxy. If he was truly needed to run the Empire, he had an awful lot of free time. If he was just a figurehead, he had an awful lot of power.

Then a romantic relationship develops between Jacob and the Emperor. I believed the relationship, and I thought the barriers between them were realistic and well-developed. That was the strongest part of the book, in my view, but it still left me with questions. No one batted an eye at the Emperor's same-sex relationship, unless they were so horrified by the thought of homosexuality that Jake goads a high-ranking Duke by implying he's trying for the same. If this future Empire has a more open-minded view of same-sex relationships, why is it still associated with weakness to the point where an accusation of such would justify hitting someone?

The ease of solving the main conflict actually detracts from the tension in the middle, which was disappointing. The ending is also far more drawn out than it needs to be. I'd gotten the idea we were dealing with a happily ever after long before it's spelled out. There's also a scene towards the end that implies Jacob hasn't learned a thing from everything he's been through.

This book is a romance with science fiction trappings, but the science fiction and future technology elements are often shied away from. They're background. The sexual element, too, while strong in emotion, is scant on explicit detail. That was actually a relief, as it put the focus on the characters' emotions, rather than their physical gratification. This was not a story about people falling in lust; it was about love in an unrecognizable setting. Due to the science-fiction-lite description, I'd be more comfortable calling this a fantasy setting.

I had to look up the publisher before I could write my review, because the editing seemed inadequate. Sentence fragments abound, as do comma splices. Even if the above questions couldn't have been answered, surely a professional publisher should've noticed the grammar issues. To my surprise, the publisher is a well-established one that has discovered several reputable science fiction and fantasy authors.

This is Leah Petersen's debut. The writing mechanics can be fixed. She has the elements of a successful book, here. Hopefully in future novels, she'll also have the presentation down.



View all my reviews

Writing Vacations

Goodnow Flow in Newcomb, NY. Picture taken by
my cellphone.

It's been almost a year since I posted about getting away from your writing, and I thought I'd revisit it. I just spent a weekend in the Adirondacks, away from cell towers and internet access. I spent most of it reading or talking to the friends I'd gone with.


For me, part of the appeal was in reminding myself of how little I need the internet. I spend a collective couple of hours a week just refreshing my usual sites, when I could be spending that time writing. Going off to do something else, where I'm away from the internet and Twitter updates on my phone, shows me how much more fulfilling my life can be when I'm not sitting around online.

I may well have gotten some writing material this weekend. I'm writing my haunted house story, and there were a number of strange noises in the cabin on the lake. Just the call of a loon late at night is enough to get the imagination going, and there were strange noises all night to keep my adrenaline up. (I did sleep, and rather well, once I distracted myself from generating story ideas for my current project.)

There were a lot of experiences I'd never had before. The little country store had hummingbird feeders, and hummingbirds were swarming. I'd never seen one so close up. During a walk, one of my companions nearly stepped on a little snake who was making its way across the dirt road. I'd never been to the Adirondacks, and I'd never been on a trip for just women. I learned a lot about my friends.

I also had a lot of time to read, which is conducive to improvement in my writing. The more I have to draw on, the more good examples I have to emulate, the more bad examples I have of things to avoid, the more I level up.

If I'd wanted it to be, such an escape could've been an excellent place to get lots of writing done, free from distraction. Instead, I used it to charge up my creative batteries.

I hope your summers bring with them a break, and a chance to experience something new. It might sound contradictory for me to write about time off when I also post about prioritizing your time, but I think what you do in the time you're not writing is just as important as setting aside time in your busy day to write.

Review: The Blind Assassin

The Blind Assassin by Margaret Atwood

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



I had to sleep on this one before I could rate it. My initial feeling when I finished listening to it on audio was of overwhelming sadness, and I was tempted to rate it more harshly for upsetting me. But it's a well-crafted tale that can affect one emotionally, so I thought it deserved some stepping back to consider. In the end, I concluded that this isn't my favorite Margaret Atwood book, but it is well-crafted.

The Blind Assassin is a story within a story within a story. The inner layer is a science fiction tale about an alien society in its early barbaric days. A young woman whose tongue was cut out and a young man blinded from his days weaving carpets fall in love, and escape their doomed city. The next layer out is two nameless lovers. The man in the pairing is telling the woman the story of the blind assassin. He's a writer who usually churns out cheesy pulp science fiction, but he's also in hiding for being falsely accused of murder. Then the outermost layer is Iris Chase Griffen, a woman in her 80s who's writing her early life story, most of which falls between WWI and WWII. She moves between a present day she hardly recognizes and a past full of pain. She writes about her sister, Laura, who went off a bridge in Iris's car in 1945.

The story is told out of chronological order, interspersed with news articles pertaining to the narrative, though their relation isn't immediately obvious in all cases. The story especially seems to jump around toward the end, until the last of the story is told and it's all tied together.

I was worried the novel would leave me guessing until the very end about some of the hints it kept dropping, but Iris does spell out her secrets she's so reluctant to disclose. There is one question left at the very end, but answering it would've cheapened the narrative. I like the answer I came up with.

The story is frustrating to listen to in places. Iris has so little power, so little freedom, in her marriage to Richard Griffen. He and his sister, Winifred Griffen Prior, are determined to keep Iris helpless and in the dark. Reading (or listening to it on audio) is an exercise in feeling that loneliness, boredom, restlessness. I felt chills when the narrator read me what Iris did to rebel. Good for her!

This is also a story about sisters. Laura and Iris grow up and mature into adult women, but their relationship dynamic remains a constant. Iris remains exasperated with her sister's enigmatic nature, her own responsibility to look after her, while Laura stays a dreamer who sees no differentiation between herself and her big sister. What's Iris's is Laura's, in Laura's eyes, and she assumes Iris feels the same way. The relationship between the sisters was probably the strongest aspect of the book.

There are also literary elements I don't like. Rich people make themselves miserable, cheat on one another, constantly drink alcohol to excess, and fail to talk about important things. Those felt more logical and necessary in this book than in other literary books with the same elements, but they still felt like clichés.

I listened to this book on audio, narrated by Margot Dionne. She has a slight accent I couldn't place, but that she plays up for certain characters to set their dialogue apart in the narrative. She speaks very crisply and distinctly, with no change in volume or modulation. I didn't have to keep adjusting my volume to hear murmurs or whispers, only to turn it back down when people shouted. I listened to a fair chunk of the audio book while I was walking, and it certainly made the time pass.

Margaret Atwood has a grounding in poetry, though, so she chooses her words carefully, selecting a lyrical presentation whenever possible. Even the less pleasant sections of the narrative are pretty to listen to.

If, like me, you've had this book recommended from dozens of sources, I highly recommend giving the audio edition a listen. The lyricism of the words really comes to life when spoken aloud.



View all my reviews

5 Ways Fanfic Can Make You a Better Writer

I posted earlier this week about what I think of fanfic. I promised then that I would talk about the edge fanfic writers have over their literary peers. So, here's my list of 5 ways fanfic can help you be a better author. Please bear in mind, I'm not saying that fanfic writers aren't "real" writers, only that it can lend an edge to those seeking traditional publishing routes.

1. You learn to take criticism. Within the fanfic community, there's a system of receiving and giving feedback. Most are paired up with a beta reader, or they have a whole slew of them. The betas will help make it a better story. Additionally, when you post a fanfic online, people will post their responses. This is good preparation for changing a story in response to editorial comments.

However, the fanfic community also tends to foster more of a positive attitude than the reading public in general. Those coming from a fanfic background may react more strongly to a negative review than one elsewhere, because they've become accustomed to comments directed at them. Some have surmised that the recent backlashes against reviewers has come about from those "graduating" from fanfic. I don't think that's a fair assessment, but I do think that fanfic writers need to remember that not everyone will be as nice as the people leaving comments on your fics.

2. You learn to give constructive criticism. As I mentioned above, fanfic writers are frequently paired with beta readers. That means that they, too, must serve as a beta reader, and give useful feedback without upsetting the person they're critiquing. This is a good skill to have, and often works to make the people offering critique better at spotting problems in their own works.

3. You can experiment. Fanfic writers are working in someone else's world, with someone else's characters. That leaves them free to break any and every other rule, and to see how it works. It might not make for a readable fic, but it does make for a fun diversion for the writer. It also lets them think outside established literary techniques to find something else that works.

4. You get immediate feedback. If a fanfic writer is normally getting a dozen or so comments per installment, and suddenly that writer gets 100, that indicates she's doing something right. If she normally gets hundreds of comments but the response to her latest is only a dozen or so unenthusiastic remarks, clearly there was some misstep. It might not always be logical or obvious, but, if a pattern emerges, that writer can quickly figure out what her weaknesses might be, and work on them.

5. It's fun. Writers will tell you how writing is hard work, it's a slog, and it's not always fun and games. But, if they didn't enjoy some part of it, they wouldn't do it. There are plenty of terrible, joyless, difficult jobs that pay more. Writers write because it's fun. If you're having fun while you're learning the ropes, then you're well ahead of your degree-earning peers, who are slogging their way through classes meant to teach them how hard writing is.

If you're a fanfic writer, you may not benefit from any of these. You may not want to. But, if you are interested in traditional publication on an original work, all of your writing practice may serve you well, for the above reasons.

I would advise against submitting your fanfic for publication, though, for various reasons. Most of the spinoff series you see on the shelves were specifically commissioned by the publisher by authors who were already established as publishable, by their own original works. And don't approach the authors themselves; they'll refuse to look at your fanfic for legal reasons.

Instead, you're best off sharing your fanfic with the fanfic community, and working on your original fiction on the side as you hone your skills. Nothing says you can't borrow elements after you file the serial numbers off, but there is a difference between an element here and there and a recognizable story and characters.

There is one notable exception, and I won't invoke its name. I'm sure you all know what I'm talking about.

Fanfic: What Is It Good For?

During my writing group on Sunday, we talked about various things, some of them only marginally related to writing, some of them not related to writing at all. Two of the members got to talking about how they used fanfic to build up writing momentum. One of them was writing some fanfic now, and sharing it, while another was writing very short real-person fics that she wasn't sharing. I thought I should post about the use of fanfic in learning to write, because it can play a role.
Before I talk about how it can help, though, I want to make sure we're on the same page. If you don't ever write for anything else, I'm not calling you a fake writer. I think the fanfic community is an important piece of fandom. It's often fanfic that keeps up the interest in the series while fans wait for the next installment, and it helps build a sense of community around shared interests. There's no shame in choosing to write only fanfic for the rest of your days.

To those of you who don't know what fanfic is, it's short for fan fiction. It's unauthorized stories written and usually shared online about books, TV shows, movies, comics, even celebrities that spark fans' imaginations. When I first heard the term, most fanfic was of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, though the phenomenon goes back to the original Star Trek and Lord of the Rings. If you include published literary work in the definition (and many fans do), you can trace it back to Hans Christian Anderson, the Grimms, and Shakespeare, who all pilfered from other sources.

Publishing houses are generally opposed to fanfic based on the "intellectual property" argument. It's hard to point to any lost revenue, though, as fanfic is exchanged for free and may contribute to a growing fandom in the slump between installments. There are those who credit the Harry Potter franchise's success on fanfic, though I would hesitate to do so, as it's a difficult thing to prove.

Some authors shy away from it, lest they're accused of plagiarizing from a fanfic piece. Others support it, again without setting eyes on it. Still others are horrified by its very existence, and can't stand that other people are playing with their characters. As some fanfic pairs up characters who don't appear on the page (or screen) together, and some depict sexual acts which would never have occurred in what the writer originally depicted (called "canon" by fandom), sometimes, authors are offended by what seems to be fans thinking they know better than the creator.

I used to have a much harsher view toward fanfic, but, as with most things, I've relaxed my opinion. Part of it happened when I was getting myself motivated to write my trilogy, and I wondered aloud what fanfic of it might look like. As my friend proposed more and more ridiculous scenarios and pairings, between my giggles, I remarked that I should be so lucky to have people like it enough to write fanfic about it.

I also learned of several authors who'd gotten their start in fanfic, and I got to thinking about how it might've helped them become stronger writers. That will be my next post, because this one is already running long.

I will not write fanfic, myself, but I do think there are far worse places to start for those who wish to write professionally. I'll outline why in my next post.

Review: Succubus Blues by Richelle Mead

Succubus Blues by Richelle Mead

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



I had some trepidation halfway through this book. The author was using a romance trope I hate, and I didn't yet know if it was being subverted or promoted. A character constantly pushes Georgina's boundaries, ignores her very clear communication, and shows stalker tendencies. I was worried he would turn out to be her love interest, and then I would have to throw the book across the room.

There was no book-throwing. Instead, I enjoyed the conclusion.

Succubus Blues is about Georgina Kincaid, a succubus who's lived a couple thousand years, sucking out men's life energy by seducing them. Her sexual mores would horrify most good Christians. She is what she is, and she's not going to apologize for her need to sleep around with terrible people. It's easier to forgive her for that, knowing it's not the great coup these jerks think they've landed.

In modern day Seattle, Georgina is the assistant manager at a bookstore, where her idol is coming in for a signing. She has some curious notions about writerly fame, which can be forgiven knowing the author is inserting them for humor value. Richelle Mead knows better; Georgina does not.

Then supernatural creatures are suddenly dying and being attacked, and Georgina isn't content to leave it to the local demon and angel authorities. It doesn't help one little bit that the killer starts addressing sick love notes to her.

I liked Georgina's voice in this book. She's an interesting blend of seductive, snarky demon and naivete. I liked her friends, too, and I most certainly want to read more of Seth. I'm wary of the assertion he makes, though, that pairing off the main characters will make readers lose interest. As meta-commentary, it's frustrating to think it might mean he and Georgina will always have more obstacles than snuggling time.

There's a lot to like about the book, which is why I'm puzzled about why I was able to set it down and leave it for three nights in a row. There's a slump a little past midway, when things start feeling repetitive and predictable.

That slump isn't going to keep me from reading later installments, though. I enjoyed this book a lot, and I found the ending satisfying, if on the predictable side.

I didn't read up on the author until I was almost finished with the book, and I learned only then that she's a biblical scholar. That explains a lot; she has a lot of Bible tidbits I hadn't realized nor learned. I felt that added a lot to a book about angels and demons. There was a whole layer of depth I hadn't expected.

If you're looking for some enjoyable urban fantasy with some smut and solid worldbuilding, you should give this book a try.



View all my reviews

Editing: Give Space

I started posting about the editing process a couple of weeks ago, and I mentioned then that I had a whole series about it. This is the second post in that series.

When you first write a story, you've just poured hours and days and weeks and months into crafting that tale, and getting it right. Even if you know, objectively, that some of the scenes were slapdash, and you left marks within the text to denote where you should expand or truncate or otherwise fix, you're going to feel like you're killing your own flesh and blood if you change any of the words.

As you gain distance from those words, though, the more objective you are about them. If you leave them be for a couple of weeks, you may find places where the writing is uneven, or some of the word choices were wrong. Leave the draft for a few months, though, and, if you're anything like me, you'll be wondering who the heck wrote it when you next pick it up.

Better writers than me have advised putting the manuscript into a drawer, or a trunk, or otherwise putting it away where you can't see it. Nowadays, though, few of us print out our first drafts. We're talking about electronic copy. What I would advise would be to put it in a folder you don't look at every single day, and mark on your calendar when it's safe to look at.

Then, go work on something else. Forget about your first draft for a while. You'll need to do some trial and error before you'll know exactly how long you need, but I started with six months, the first time I took this advice. My trial and error yielded a minimum of two months. There is no maximum; I've picked up things I wrote a decade ago and had no idea what stranger was writing such terrible stories in my voice.

Generally speaking, though, by the time I've finished whatever I picked up to make me forget my last project, I'm ready to face that last project and can handle editing it. If I stop my "distraction" project too soon, though, and pick up the first one too soon, I'll be too attached to what I find, and I won't want to edit or cut anything. Once I've talked myself into letting something stay, it stays, often to the detriment of the manuscript.

You should never bank all of your writing success on one story, and you should never work on one thing to the exclusion of all else. That you'll need time to let go of your first-draft words is part of the reason why.

So, when you think you're ready to edit a first draft, make sure you've given it enough space that you'll be able to.

Grammar Peeves: Filler

I thought I'd posted about all of the grammar sins that bother me, but my published friend retweeted a tweet from her editor that reminded me about another I'd meant to write about.

In a novel, it's rarely the case that every single word counts. You don't have the economy of a short story or poem. And yet, if you establish a pattern in wasting a reader's time throughout your novel, you'll lose them as effectively as if you'd written something offensive. While that usually comes about with long scenes that don't address the plot, it can also happen on a sentence level. Here are a few ways how.

• Progression—A good sign you're delaying your sentences is if you talk about progressions on a task, rather than the task, itself. "Started to," "in the process of," "finished," "worked on," and similar phrases halt the action, rather than moving it forward.
• Synonyms and Definitions—This is one I know I'm guilty of. I write something like, "Conciseness, or using just a few words to describe something, is a skill that doesn't come naturally." It wasn't necessary that I define the term, but I did it, anyway. I'll also start to list words that mean the same thing, when one would do.
• Redundancy—"PIN" is an acronym for "personal identification number." Calling it a "PIN number" grates on my last nerve. "ATM" is "automatic teller machine," so if you call it an "ATM machine" within your text, I will question your intelligence. It's a great phrase to put in your character's mouth to show he's not all there, but, if you don't know any better, I have no sympathy for you. Similarly, empty words that add nothing to the sentence don't belong.
• Qualifiers—If you've heard adverbs are evil, this is why. "Just," "only," "really," "mostly," "usually," "basically," serves to weaken a sentence, rather than help it. Similarly, if you describe how dialogue is delivered (flippantly, sarcastically, seriously, quietly), your dialogue is failing.
• Fluffed-up Phrases—"The fact that," "The reality of it was," "The system of," "The mechanism that," "As we all know," indicate that the writer is going about this story the long way around. These phrases and similar have their uses, but overuse makes the story look like a NaNoWriMo gone awry.

It is possible to use any or all of the above without stalling your sentences in the middle. Filler words can contribute to the overall flow of a sentence, and they can be used in dialogue to show the character is a blowhard.

During your editing phase, note any of the above you find in your manuscript. Keep a file of them. If you notice they keep cropping up, start to pick and choose where they belong, and use ctrl+f (cmd f on a Mac) to find instances of filler.

Your writing is stronger when you don't fill it up with unnecessary words. Also, readers appreciate that you didn't make them wade through useless text to get to the good stuff.

Reading, Revisited

Before I begin tonight's regularly-scheduled blog post, I'd like to point out that I'm participating in the Austen in August reading event at Roof Beam Reader. The link contains details, and all you have to do to sign up is comment on that post. I've signed up to read Persuasion, and to reread Mansfield Park. If I have time, I'll also reread Sense and Sensibility. I had the excellent good fortune of being able to discover Jane Austen's works on my own, rather than in school, so I've always enjoyed her books.

Speaking of reading, I just read The Ultimate David Sedaris Audio Collection (well, okay, I listened to it), and I reviewed each collection within it individually. That took about forever and a day to type up, but I did it. I'm pointing you in that direction because I'm in such shock that I went so long without his brand of humor in my life that I must rectify this situation if the same applies to you.

Clearly, tonight I want to post about reading. I've already done so, in the early days of my blog, but I think it deserves a revisit.

I remember remarking more than once that reviewing every book I read has me looking at books differently. I'm paying more attention to what I can learn from each writer, trying actively to guess the endings, and noting things I didn't think the authors did as well as they could. I joked about leveling up as a writer, and I think I can credit a lot of that to picking out elements I like in books, figuring out what I want to emulate or do better than the author, and analyzing what works.

In theory, I already knew I had to do this, but I hadn't been putting it into practice as well as I have been in the last several months. I don't know if it's because of the blog, the writing group, or just some switch I flipped in my brain, but the passive exercise of reading has been far more helpful in my evolution lately than it's ever been.

Knowing you have to do something and doing it isn't always as easy as getting up off your butt, or sitting down at your computer, or closing down the internet. Sometimes things take a long while to take hold, or you have to keep practicing until it sticks.

If I could reverse engineer how I finally made it stick, I'd teach every new writer how to do it. Alas, all I can do is tell you what a revelation it is, and to keep reading and working on it. After all, if you want to be a writer, I assume you already like to read. So, it's not like learning how to read as a writer is a terrible chore. Are you really going to complain if I tell you your homework is to read as many books as you want, and only the ones you want to?

Review: The Ultimate David Sedaris Audio Collection

The Ultimate David Sedaris Audio Collection by David Sedaris
My rating: 4 of 5 stars

This is a collection of abridged David Sedaris books on audio, read mostly by the author with some contributions from his sister, Amy Sedaris. The collection includes Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim, Live at Carnegie Hall, Naked, Holidays on Ice, and Barrel Fever and Other Stories. The only one I haven't reviewed separately is Live at Carnegie Hall, because there were so many repeats, it didn't seem fair to rate it separately.

Taken as a whole, it's sort of overwhelming for someone with no exposure to David Sedaris before, save random mentions on internet comments. This was the only form I could take out Me Talk Pretty One Day from my local library, though, so I figured I'd listen to the rest, while I was at it. I'm not sure I'd recommend it for a beginner, because it is a bit much. But, there's plenty of context within the stories to introduce one to David Sedaris's sense of humor.

The live tracks helped a lot. As I noted in my first review, I realized I was supposed to be laughing at these wry, dark observations, and that I wasn't the only one mean enough to laugh at his pain. Sedaris's sense of humor is both dark and self-deprecating, and his delivery is quite dry.

Having listened to this audio set, I can't believe I made it this far in my life without having read anything by David Sedaris before. This is very much the kind of humor I appreciate.

If you're a fan of David Sedaris, or you're looking for a gift for someone who is, I think you could do a lot worse than keeping this set around for a gloomy day. I don't recommend you dive right in as I did, unless you're prepared for dark humor, delivered dryly. My immersion served me well, but it was a gamble.


View all my reviews