Help for Writing in the First Person...from Wendy LaCapra

I've recently been called upon to read a friend's partial manuscript--all written in the first person.

I recently wrote a short story in the first person, which I had never seriously done before.

And I realized there are pitfalls.

The hardest one for me was the "telling" pitfall.  How on earth do you avoid telling if you are writing "I"?  I mean, isn't using "I," by its very nature, telling?

Well, there are ways, and aspiring author Wendy LaCapra taught them to me.  Following are a few examples from my story and how Wendy helped me make them a LOT bolder, better, and more-showy-and-less-tell-y:

EXAMPLE 1

Telling:  "It was no wonder I acted as if I had received Willy Wonka's Golden Ticket."

Wendy's Way:  "I clutched it (the ticket) to my chest like it was Willy Wonka's Golden Ticket."

Do you see what she's done here?  She's made it visual.  Using the strong verb "clutched" makes you visualize clutching a precious object to your chest.  You can see it.  And therefore you can feel it.

EXAMPLE 2

Telling:  I had grown up, and left my hurtful penchant for bad boys in the past.

Wendy's Way:  The day he slipped an engagemnet ring on my finger, I knew I had grown up and left my hurtful penchant for bad boys in the past.

Why it works:  A vivid, concrete image your brain can sink its teeth into.

EXAMPLE 3

More (yawn) telling:  She had stopped by my tiny shoebox of an office to make dinner plans.

Wendy's Way:  She tried to lean across my cluttered desk without causing the stacks of books and papers to fall.

Same thing, the telling is changed to SENSORY images.  You can do this using any sense.  Use all five!

EXAMPLE 4

Telling:  Well, my thesis had been Jane Austen:  The Woman's Woman.  But had anyone outside of my small liberal arts English department even read it?

Wendy's Way:   "You do recall my thesis was Jane Austen:  The Woman's Woman."  But had anyone outside of my small liberal arts English department even read it?

See the conversion of telling to dialogue?

BOTTOM LINE:  Enhance your first-person writing by changing dull telling by injecting emotional and sensory images.  And use dialogue instead of telling, too.

Thank you, Wendy!  I think you're brilliant!  :)

Do You Slump When You Work, or Proper Posture at Your Computer

Do you spend hours every day sitting down at the screen typing away?  Ask yourself these questions to see if you're stressing your body by not doing it properly!

• Do your ears line up with your shoulders and hips (like they should if you are sitting up straight)?
• Is the top of your screen at forehead level?  (hard to do if you're on a laptop!)
• Are your mouse and keyboard directly in front of you at elbow height?  (The answer is 'no' if you're sitting at a desk or table with your laptop.)  (Your elbows should be bent at 90 degrees.) 
• Is your upper arm hanging straight down?
• Is your lower back supported by the backrest of your chair? 
• Feet flat on floor, thighs parallel to floor?
• Don''t forget to walk around and "circulate" regularly, as well as get regular exercise.

And here's a picture of proper hand posture:

 

My office has a semi-ergonomic setup, and I'm working on making it better.  I just bought a large monitor that I can connect up to my laptop that is at eye level.  Trouble is, I often get sick of working there and tend to take my laptop to work in a sunny room, especially when the weather is nice.  So I often catch myself slumped over my laptop, squinting at the screen.

Here's to proper posture to increase our endurance while we work!  Now, if someone could only come up with a few more hours in each day...



Sources:

PT handout:  A Self-Guided Ergonomic Assessment for the Seated Compouter Operator E.K. Benner,, M.A., P.T., O.C.S.

http://ctya.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/posture.png

http://www.keral.com/upload/image/Here-ar-some-correct-postures/posture1.jpg

Life is Like a Box of Chocolates...

"...you never know what you're gonna get."  Forrest Gump was right.  And it looks like this year, I didn't get a Golden Heart final, nor did some of my very talented friends. 

But for those who did, Congratulations!   You were recognized for your talent and determination, and you earned it!

The GH lists are not quite complete, but I did recognize many of the names on the list.  Which makes me excited, because we are part of a community.  And seeing others succeed who have worked so hard is proof that hard work does bring results.

So today, since I just dipped into my emergency hidden stash of Ghirardelli Luxe Milk Almond Squares, I thought I'd post some facts about chocolate to put all of us non-winners into a better mood.

Chocolate is a natural antidepressant because it produces serotonin in your body.  And a natural aphrodisiac because of the procuction of phenylethylamine, the chemical we produce when we're in love.

So next time you're writing that love scene, break out the chocolate!

Scientifically speaking, chocolate is NOT addictive (but not to my body).

1.4 ounces of dark chocolate  lowers cortisol and catecholamines, reducing anxiety, thus helping you get that job done and deal with stresses, like not winning the GH.

Dark chocolate has more antioxidants than light, but 71% of Americans prefer light.

The ancient Aztecs drank it, as did the folks in Regency England, often in coffee houses, the precursors to our Starbucks.  It was served in tall cups with milk added.

Cocoa powder was produced in the 18th century, and made by a machine for the first time in 1828.  At home, people carefully cooked chocolate or cocoa wtih milk and flavorings in a chocolate pot (that resembled a samovar with legs).  In the coffee house, it would be whipped to a froth (just like a Starbucks cappuchino, coming right up!)

So, Gals, drink it or eat it, but then we're going to do our BICHOK (butt in chair, hands on keyboard) and write those stories.

Because we're writers, and GH or not, that's what we do.   


Sources

20-20 Site 

The Jane Austen Centre Magazine 

It's Golden Heart Week

It's the week we've all been waiting for!  Doesn't last November, when we cautiously and optimistically FedEx'd our bulging packages full of manuscript copies and binder clips goodbye on the crisp autumn breeze, seem SO long ago?

On Friday, the calls go out from RWA to the winners of the Golden Heart Contest for unpublished writers.  I'm very excited because this year, I know so many more people who are "going for the gold" thanks to Cyndi D'Alba setting up a loop for a bunch of us who entered.  Plus, I have friends who are anxiously (or not so anxiously) holding their breath.

I'll be following the Ruby Slippered Sisterhood all week.  They are posting GH-related topics all week.  Today's was "T-minus Four and Counting to Golden Heart Day." 

It was a great hoot to follow their blog last year where they celebrated with everyone's announcements as they happened, and the winners often stopped in to say hi and give their reactions.

To the friends I know who entered, GOOD LUCK!!!   

See you all on Friday--I am going to stock up on my secret chocolate stash for fortitude!

Brain Fatigue and Maturing Your Manuscript

I really hate brain fatigue.  The kind that prevents you from seeing mistakes.  When you work on a manuscript day in and day out, you are bound to get it.  Here are the top three annoying mistakes I often make and then catch only after I've had a rest from a manuscript:

--I use the same words, especially verbs and adjectives, over and over, within a short space of one another.   Don't know why, just happens.  Seems like it happens more with the more unusual words--like my brain thinks they are clever and wants to keep using them.

--I lose my ear for good dialogue.  Even if I think it's good at the time, it doesn't sound so good later.

--I sacrifice emotional depth to plot.  I think it's all I can do to get the plot down the first couple of go-rounds.   Have to really think and make connections and layer in emotional conflict as time goes on.

These are all reasons why writing is not a solitary profession after all.  I used to think it was.  But connections are made and ideas are grown when work is shared...not to mention, mistakes are fixed!

I entered my newest manuscript into the Golden Heart last fall, but it has "ripened" and changed a lot since then.  Seems like my writing needs this time to be re-thought out and given depth through draft after draft.

I wonder, with experience, do you make less of these errors?  Do you "get it" quicker?

The Ethics of Coordinating a Contest

A little while ago I did a post on the difficulties of judging the GH.  Today I have some comments on being a category coordinator for my local RWA chapter contest.  Judging the GH was a piece of cake compared to this job!

I have a new appreciation for the ethical dilemmas of contest coordinators.  For new judges--making sure they are mentored in their judging, and don't submit scores that are too low or too high.  That is a very gray area.  If a person has never judged before, and gives an entrant a very low score, say a 30, would you bring it to their attention?  Okay, I hear all the "yeses" out there.  But what if they give someone a 50?  Some judges, such as myself, believe that a score of 50 should be reserved for entrants whose entries aren't submitted in English.  But others feel that a "50" is a justifiable score.  So do you call the judge out on that or not?

If an entrant "deserves" a 50,  I still would not give them a 50.  Why?  Because I believe a 50 is a crushing score.  A brand new writer, maybe entering a contest for the first time, may not know the basics of a romance entry in a contest.  They may not understand about internal conflict and external conflict.  Their plot may be weak or nonexistent.    Their dialogue may be stilted and their writing may be full of cliches.  Their characters may behave erratically and you may despise their hero or heroine.  This person is never going to win the contest, so why crush them?  In my opinion, giving them a score in the 60s or 70s serves the same point--it tells them their writing needs more work, but in a far less vicious way.

People enter contests for one reason--for feedback.  And our job when we volunteer to judge is to deliver that feedback in the most mentoring way possible.

I just cannot understand the mentality of judges who may deliver spot-on criticism but dish it out in the cruelest way possible.  Statements like I hate your  hero, your heroine is too stupid to live, your characters are not interesting, you don't have a plot, etc. are tactless and hurtful.  The tone and the delivery of such comments demonstrates a lack of skill set on the part of the judge.

If judges would imagine they are sitting across from someone telling them these comments, would they phrase them in quite the same way?
When you are up close and personal with someone who looks vulnerable, the answer is NO.
So why be that way on paper?

Do judges like this assume the worst about people--that they are lazy and didn't do their homework and so deserve to be treated as harshly as possible?  Sort of a "tough love" philosophy?  I imagine in my mind that these are the same people who would say that anyone living in poverty should just stop whining and get a job.  Maybe they feel publishing is a difficult business and people may as well hear how badly they suck right up front?

Can we not assume that contest entrants are simply at different skill levels, with different access to knowledge and mentoring?  They are looking for feedback, are likely not confident about their writing, just looking for some help.  Why crush someone's dream?

When I did peer tutoring at the university writing center in grad school, we were taught to always point out what the student did well first.  Play to their strengths, and then they are more willing and able to accept their weaknesses.   (My experience is that this works with kids, too.)  Statements like, "portions of _____(your plot, your dialogue, the actions of your hero, whatever) confused me because..." or "I really think you could amp up the conflict by..." or I think your ____ is good, but I would make the following suggestion..."  are so much more tactful and kind.  They still get the message across, too.  And the person doesn't go home crying!

Judges volunteer their time and spend a lot of time on their entries.  And a contest coordinator has a responsiblitiy to be fair to the entrants while not manipulating anyone into changing their scores.  But if a judge tends to be very direct and critical, I would at least like to see a general statement about the entry given up front that mentions its strengths before the judge plunges into a page of criticism.

Because there is always something good to be said.

What Leslie Dow Learned from Lori Wilde--a post from Savvy Authors

Aspiring autrhor Leslie Dow did a post on Savvy Authors today about being savvy in the business of writing called "What I Learned from Lori Wilde." Lori offers a write-a-novel-in-six-months class through Savvy U.that Leslie took and enjoyed a lot.

You can read Leslie's full post at Savvy Authors here.

Pearls from this post follow.  Lori says, "Your writing is neither as bad as you fear nor as good as you hope."  The truth is likely somewhere in between and can be controlled by hard work and perserverance in honing your craft.  Writing is a businesss in which an author produces a product for the marketplace.  You can produce the finest writing in the world, but if there's no market, you have no sale.   Study and apply techniques from authors who are at the top of their genre.  And network, even if you are the world's greatest introvert.  It takes people besides ourselves sitting day in and out at your keyboard to succeed in this business!

Great tips to remind us that we can't write in a vaccuum.