What's on the Bookshelf?

I've been somewhat of a snob lately when it comes to reading . . .and it makes me want to cry.

Why? Well, I picked up a romance (woot) by one of my favorite authors and ended up rolling my eyes every other paragraph. I blame my inner-editor, but when it starts interfering with just enjoying a book, then you know it's time to re-evaluate the situation. Which led me to two conclusions.

1) That I was being overly critical, having aftershocks from editing "Fury", and needed to give Ms. Favorite Author a break.

2) The book really did suck, and I had just realized that one of my favorite authors wasn't such a great author after all. ::cry::

So, I head to the bookshelf. Well, THE bookshelf (I have two, you see. One for generic books that were "ok" and one for my FAVORITES). Well, her books are on THE bookshelf, which is one of those sleek, cherry, leaning bookshelves that I honestly squealed over when my boyfriend bought it for me for Christmas <3.>

They're women.

::Gasp!:: I'm a sexist reader! 

Well, I had to prove that I wasn't a sexist, so I delved and found that I happen to have a few books on there by men. They are as follows: Christopher Paolini's books; J.R.R. Tolkien's LOTR trilogy and The Hobbit; Piers Anthony's Dragon on a Pedestal; Nicholas Sparks' The Lucky One (which I haven't read, whoops); and The Bible (argue all you want, it was written by MEN). 

The rest, which usually include more than one book, are by Anne Bishop <3, Julie Garwood, Teresa Medeiros, Stephenie Meyer (hey, they're hardbacks), Kristen Britain, J. K. Rowling and...

I think that's it. They're some art books, and then my books stuffed in binders, but that's it.

Still, if you look at it with squinty eyes, you're going to see that the female authors overwhelm the men. Looking at it--still squinty eyed--I came to the conclusion on why that was:

Women tend to write about other women. They have strong female characters who are, more often than not, the protagonists. As a woman, I like reading about female heroes. And, if they're not the hero, they have to be more than one-dimensional. Male writers (not all!) seem to have the problem of putting women in categories. This is especially true with "classic" literature. And since they got away with it centuries ago, some modern male writers think they can still get away with it. The Rejectionist had a hilarious rant about receiving such manuscripts recently.

However, I have no desire to avoid male writers simply because they're male. So I'm trying to broaden my horizons. If you have recommendations, I'm all ears.

I'm BACK!!!

I'm finally back from vacation (if you could call it that). 

I got back into Arkansas around 11:30 a.m. Friday and just wanted to shout for joy. I've seriously never been so stressed on a trip. And when you top dollops of stress with a recovering immune system, what do you get? 

Apparently, hair loss.

The sad thing is I'm not joking. Fortunately, I have enough hair to suffocate in, so losing a few handfuls isn't going to be too noticeable. Except that my hairdresser noticed. Eek. So I'm loading myself up with vitamins and meditation, and hopefully that will work.

It helps, too, that I'm no longer dealing with a 60-year-old man who acts like a freakin' toddler. Grr. There are some people that I wish to cut out of my life, but, unfortunately, they're related. So that's not possible. Drat it.

But, the point of this post (other than letting you know I'm back) is that I have to apologize. 

I'm sorry . . . because I did not work on "Fury" or "Dragon Queen" at all. I had the time, I'll admit. But I was so aggravated the whole time we were in West Virginia that I couldn't grasp the Muse. If I was writing a battle scene, I might have managed it. But, nope. Sorry. Sorry!

I promise to be a good girl (and a good writer) and write furiously this week. Hopefully we shall see the end of Dragon Queen soon!

Sing-a-long

I'm a lover of diverse music. You're as likely to find me jamming to Pearl Jam as SheDaisy. I like Beethoven and Merle Haggard, Disturbed and Pink. Heck, I even like Eminem. 

But there is one thing that just really kills a song for me:

It's message.

That's why you won't find me listening to a lot of rap or hip-hop, because I don't like to hear about phat rides or bootylicious babes and how gangstas are pimpin. Mainly, I don't care, and usually I find it laughable. But there is one song that has really got me annoyed lately:

"Joey" by Sugarland.

It's been a long time since I've loathed a song, but I. Hate. This. One. Why? Because I think it glorifies self-loathing and guilt over things that you have absolutely no control over. According to The Boot the song is about a teen boy who dies in a car wreck, leaving the singer (in this case, Jennifer Nettles) to bemoan all the things she could have done to stop it.

WTF?

"I'm so sorry," the narrator sings. For what? Really? I'm waiting for the second version of this song. 

"I'm so sorry for cutting your brake lines..." That's a song that would make sense.

Do we honestly want to encourage this kind of inane thinking in young women who are already brainwashed into believing that true love exists in one-dimensional, immortal alpha males and that  they'll only be beautiful if they resemble skeletons? Now, let's dose them with a song about how things that are absolutely out of their hands should bring them enormous guilt. 

I repeat: WTF?

The worst thing is, once you hear it, it's stuck in your head ALL DAY LONG. It's enough to make me want to bang my head against something.

Sorry, Ms. Nettles. I love most of your other songs--but I'll never buy the album that this is on, and I am forced to turn off the radio when it comes on. 

What Your Characters Take From You, and What They Give in Return.

People often ask me, "Where do your ideas come from?"

From my characters.

"And where do your characters come from?"

From parts of me.

Often, a character will enter my head before his/her story will. Long before I knew Fury's story, I knew her. She came from a part of my life that we'll just sum up with the word "awful". She suffers from all the things that I suffer from, and I hoped that by telling her story and making her overcome some of her inner issues, not only would she grow as a character, but I would grow as a person.

I'm not sure if that makes sense, but bear with me.

You would think that the writer of a story knows exactly what is going to happen, how it is going to happen, and why it is going to happen. In my case, that's not really true. Often, I just have a vague idea, and my characters drive me toward it--often making unexpected moves along the way. Since that is the case, not only do the characters learn as they go along, but I do to. 

I learn from them.

Now, in "Fury" there is a lot of emotional/moral conflict. When I wrote it, I probably didn't even realize it, but looking back I'm able to pick it all out. And I can learn from it.

"Fury" is currently going through some major revisions, and a lot of things are getting cut. A story that started out at 119,000 words in its first rough draft, is now down to 112,000. And I'm not even halfway through. My problem--which I believed stemmed from the issues I was having in my personal life at the time--is that the story is not very active. There is a lot of inner dialogue. A lot of introspection. But my characters don't DO anything very much. I'm changing that. Not only to keep the reader's interest, but because I realized that the story is not one to be told passively. That's not its message. Characters--and people--don't change through thinking about things and just sitting around waiting for stuff to happen, they go out and do something about it.

I tend to be a passive person, but I didn't realize how much it reflected in my writing and in my characters. Fury, instead of being the active, in-your-face heroine I wanted her to be, was a mopey damsel in distress who took a total of two stands in the entire book. And even afterward she went on being passive. That's not her, and that's not the story. So I'm changing it. It means A LOT of revisions, but it will be worth it.

Because she deserves more, and I can finally recognize that. 

What's up?

Well, I'll tell you what's up: the newspaper business isn't doing so well. Not sure if I've clued you in, but I work for a local newspaper as an editorial assistant. We learned today that the big bosses have decided to merge with our competition and form a new business, in which half would be controlled by our former bosses, and have by the other companies bosses. Yay! (Not so much.) First off, the new company gets to control the newsroom (where I work) and therefore are in charge of staff. Which means that in a couple months I may or may not have a job. I'm crossing my fingers that I will.

As for the other spectrum of my life (my writing) I am pruning away on "Fury" and have reached Chapter 23. Yay! (For real this time.) This revision is taking longer than I thought because I'm (you won't believe it) giving my characters PERSONALITY! OMG! What? Am I crazy? I must be.

I realized that one of my main problems in "Fury" was that I took a lot of shortcuts. Telling instead of showing--lots of freaking introspection and very little action. In a word: Blah! But this new version is showing potential. I'm not changing huge things in it, so the plot is mostly the same, I'm just making it a heck of a lot juicier. Fury and Caden have some knock-out drag-outs, and you actually get to SEE it instead of being TOLD about it. For the first time, I'm actually getting to know my characters through how they act, not what they think. Hooray!

As for "Dragon Queen" ::hides head in shame:: I'm only about five chapters from the end, but I haven't been working on it. Mainly because I'm focusing on "Fury". I DO have it all outlined, however, so no worries. I pinky-swear that as soon as "Fury" is edited, I'm going to focus on "Dragon Queen". And on that note, back to work!