Words Words Words » Writing

Need yet another translation to Ancient Greek

skzb — Wed, 23 May 2012 08:19:29 +0000

I’m looking for the ancient Greek for: We can do better.

In English, there is some ambiguity there (We meaning us? We meaning humanity? My group can do better than your group?). I don’t know if those ambiguities would translate, but, if so, I want them. If not, I’ll chose the best meaning for my evil purposes.

Any help would be appreciated.

Fourth Street Fantasy Convention

skzb — Tue, 15 May 2012 09:03:11 +0000

This is a reminder to everyone who might be interested that Fourth Street Fantasy Convention is approaching. For those who don’t know, this is a small convention (100+ people) heavily oriented toward writing and writers–I sort of made it up back in, I think, the late 80′s so I could hear smart people argue about problems I was having. The theory is that anything that is about writing is also about reading; “How to Read Better” has always been an unstated discussion topic.

What distinguishes Fourth Street from most conventions are two things: 1. A very high percentage of professionals (writers, editors); and B. Strict single-track programming with lunch breaks, so everyone can be at every panel (and, of course, continue the arguments from one to the other). It used to be that did the programming; lately it’s mostly Alec Austin with help from Tom Whitmore and me, and I’ve been delighted by how things have gone. I have learned stuff. I think it has helped me write better; I know it has helped me get more out of my reading.

Check out who will be there (John Scalzi, Elizabeth Bear, Will Shetterly, Emma Bull, &c &c)

It’ll be in Minneapolis, June 22-24, and for actual, useful details, go here.

I’d love to see all of you there.

New post about the new post

skzb — Wed, 09 May 2012 02:00:25 +0000

For several days, I’ve been feeling like I should post something, but nothing comes to mind. What should I talk about?

Oh, in case anyone missed it, I did a pod interview. Tons of fun.

Too Many Danes

skzb — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 19:47:29 +0000

By Rex Stout

When the doorbell rang at the old brownstone on West 35th Street, I was already in a lousy mood. We had just finished the Beltham embezzlement case, and it was Friday, and I had wanted to celebrate by spending the weekend with Lily Rowan. Instead, Wolfe had insisted I finish the paperwork. I knew he would have no interest in a case, in any case, what with what we’d just been paid, so I made up my mind that, whoever this was, he was getting in to see Wolfe.

The man on the other side of the glass was young–I’d say in his early twenties. He was slight, but seemed athletic. When I opened the door, he said simply, “Mr. Nero Wolfe?”

“No,” I said, “I’m Archie Goodwin. But if it’s a case, I can take you in to see Mr. Wolfe. He’s just down from visiting his orchids.”

“His–? No, never mind. Yes, I’d like to see him about a case.”

“Then come in, Mr.–”

He handed me his card as I took his coat. I looked it over–expensive printing, gold lettering. I guided him to the leather chair. Wolfe looked up, glared, started to speak, but evidently put it together, because instead his lips pressed together into a thin line–or as thin a line as he can manage. I handed Wolfe the card. He glanced at it, glared at me, then turned his attention back to our guest.

“Very well,” he said. ”How can I help you, Mr. Hamlet?”

“I want you to prove that my uncle killed my father.”

He wagged his finger. ”I will do no such thing under any circumstances. Should I agree to take the case, I will endeavor to discover the truth.”

“That will be fine. As a retainer, I can–”

“Excuse me, I haven’t said I’d take it, yet. Now, what makes you think your uncle killed your father?”

“His ghost told me,” said Hamlet, as if it were the most reasonable thing in the world.

Wolfe glared at me. ”Pfui,” he said. He started to say more, but then stopped, and a sort of malicious glint came into his eye. He turned to Hamlet. ”That is very interesting,” he said. ”It is getting rather late. Perhaps you could stay to dinner and afterwards Archie can get all the details? Archie, tell Fritz we will be having a guest.”

No way around it, I was beat. I got up and headed to the kitchen to tell Fritz that something smelled rotten in the office.

[Sorry, folks. I just sorta had to. Next, Pamela will demonstrate how Shakespeare would have written Plot It Yourself.]

What the narrator knows; what the reader knows

skzb — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:19:22 +0000

I had a friend email me with a cool question: How do you let the reader in on something the first person protagonist doesn’t?

I know it’s tricky, and I know it can be done, and I know it’s a rush when you pull it off. My answer involved set-up: You establish the character as someone who is liable to miss drawing the correct conclusion when certain types of facts are in front of him, then you can have him report on things from which the reader will draw the correct conclusion, but the protagonist won’t. For example, he might reminisce about a time a certain woman was attracted to him, and talk about the way she communicated it, and then say that he didn’t realize that until much later. Now you can have his current lover drop clues that she is on the edge of breaking up with him, and the reader will believe that he doesn’t see it. If you do it well enough, that is: it’s all about walking the line between, on the one hand, making the clues so subtle the reader doesn’t catch on, and, on the other, making the clues so obvious the reader won’t believe the protagonist doesn’t get it.

Anyway, I thought it was an interesting question, and worth throwing out to the Smart People who hang out here to see what other answers emerge.

Help. I can’t remember my own work.

skzb — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 21:13:20 +0000

I”ve just written a scene for my current project in which my viewpoint character goes on a rant about being at peace with one’s self, expressing disdain for the concept. I finished it, looked at it, and said, “Wait. I’ve written this already.” Was that my imagination, or did I actually write that scene? If so, where? I should look it over to see if this one is different enough, or if I should just scrag it. If someone more familiar with my work than I am can tell me, I’d appreciate it. Thanks.

Short-short sold

skzb — Mon, 17 May 2010 21:06:05 +0000

I’ve sold a short-short called “Mira” to Sword and Sorceress #25, scheduled to be out in November. Sword and Sorceress was Emma Bull’s first sale, and, as Emma is one of my heroes (no, I’m not kidding), I’ve always wanted to have a story in that anthology. I’m delighted. The story came out of a conversation with Reesa, so special thanks to her. Smooches, too.

Progress report, and thank-you

skzb — Sun, 09 May 2010 03:23:46 +0000

I’m on the last chapter of Tiassa, and I want to take a moment to thank Alexx Kay for his timeline, Mark Mandel for Cracks and Shards, and everyone who has been maintaining the Dragaera Wiki; these resources have been especially useful over the last couple of days.

Another Tiassa Update

skzb — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 04:59:37 +0000

After several conversations with Reesa, what I think is the last chunk of Tiassa has fallen into place well enough that I can see where I’m going. I think. Maybe. For the moment. So I believe I’m on track to finish it. I have noticed that, with each of the last several books, I have pissed off some percentage of Vlad fans, and this makes me sad. So, with this book, I’m hoping to piss off all of them. I hate half measures.

Characterization discussion: Internal Logic

Reesa — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 08:21:53 +0000

Among the many and ongoing interesting discussions at our home, we’ve been talking about the concept we’re calling “internal logic” for a character. Internal logic here means that, among other things: an action that to an outside observer appears irrational, wrong, or evil, from the internal viewpoint of the character will be a justified, logical, and right action to make. It’s a useful thing to examine for most characters, but especially helpful in creating believable antagonists in a story.

Tolkien got around the need to deeply explore this by creating a world where evil really did exist, and some creatures did things because they were bad evil things to do. In this sort of scenario, you don’t have to worry too much about internal consistency for a antagonist’s actions as long as you have the formula “evil is good”. Unfortunately, Tolkien’s many imitators have generally not done as well as he did, and these days most people who encounter the Evil Overlord stereotype are likely to assign a label of “campy” “trite” or “overdone” to whichever story has the latest iteration of the trope.

Another loophole to spending a lot of time with discovering a character’s internal logic is the “Rendezvous with Rama” effect. For those of you who haven’t read or don’t remember the original story *spoiler alert skip to the next paragraph* an alien ship passes through our solar system, refuels from our sun, and departs. We send a ship out from Earth to explore the large alien ship, see lots of really interesting things, and learn nothing much about the aliens who created the ship. It’s the ultimate story in creating aliens with very alien motives that have little to nothing to do with humans except in passing.*end of spoilers*

Similarly, in Steve’s book Issola, the Jenoine are massively powerful and very alien, doing things that from the view of both the reader and the characters are hard to understand. Since that’s rather the point, we don’t really need to understand further about the Jenoine’s internal viewpoint.

With both of these examples, the unfathomability is the point of both the alien ship and the Jenoine. With characters that come closer to human-like actions and understandings, internal logic considerations become more of a factor. The world from the outside-looking-in and the inside-looking-out are often far different for people, and even for non-POV characters you might need to know something about their internal motivations. So how do you depict this?

One of my own characters tends to organize their environment in ways that to my first impressions seem counter-intuitive. It’s not a way that I would organize things, and sometimes doesn’t seem to make logical sense from my perspective. However, when I ask myself “why would [said character] arrange their things in that way?” I nearly always have an answer that comes to mind that makes sense from the viewpoint and life experiences of the character. Even if the internal explanation for the room arrangement doesn’t make it directly onto the written page, the fact that I as the writer understand why the character does a certain thing means that it’s more likely to reflect that knowledge in little bits of characterization throughout the story that will bring that understanding to the reader.

-Reesa

What springs to mind is the skeptic’s mantra: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. As it applies to fiction, it seems to me that the more bizarre the thought processes of the character, the more you have to convince the reader that the character really does think that way. The fun part is: how do you do it?

I was remembering Will Shetterly’s first novel, Cats Have No Lord, in which the antagonist’s primary motivation was fear–he did all sorts of horrible things because they seemed to be the best way to keep himself safe–and Will sold it so thoroughly that I never questioned it. Will did it with a hint here, a comment there, which was enough to clue the reader in to what was going on. Generally, I like the “less is more” approach when practicable.

The most fun way to approach it, for me, is to fall completely into the head of that character, and then write it in first person from his POV (I did that in Agyar), but there have to be other ways. I’m wondering what other people have used, or noticed.

-Steve