Should you want to add an animal to your story, here’s the First Rule of Thumb: the more important the fictional animal is to your story/plot/series, the more you need to know about the actual one. That being said, here are some snippets that floated through my brain while thinking about fictional animals
Ralph
Kiwi
Second Rule of Thumb: if you want your readers to identify with the animal, consider a dog or cat. In most Western countries, the two most popular pets are dogs and cats. There are approximately 75.5 million pet dogs and 93.6 million pet cats in the United States—compared to 5.3 million house rabbits. On the other hand, more households own dogs than cats—45.6 million households vs. 38.2 million households, respectively. Among college students, 60% identified themselves as dog lovers compared to 11% cat lovers (everyone else being both or neither). (And just a fun fact: in 2013, pets outnumbered children four to one in the U.S.)
Sticking to dogs and cats for a bit: dog owners report seeking companionship, while cat owners sought affection.
If you do go with a dog or a cat, consider how the profile of the typical owner matches your character. Overall, dog lovers are more energetic and outgoing, and are more likely to follow rules closely. Cat lovers are more introverted, open-minded, sensitive, non-conformist, and intelligent. As most people know, dogs and cats of various species have identifiable personalities and behaviors, so consider how compatible or incompatible your character and pet need to be to support your storyline. Which is your dog?
Albert
Buddy
Third Rule of Thumb: the more unusual the animal you choose, the more you might have to work for reader affection but the easier it might be to grab reader attention. Consider the red-footed tortoise.
Oogway
Only 4.7 million U.S. households own reptiles, and many of those are lizards, snakes, etc. Chances are a red-footed tortoise would be pretty unfamiliar. Few readers would know that they can grow to more than 18 inches, and live more than 30 years. Some readers would be interested to learn that they are omnivorous, rest 50% of the time, and prefer temperatures around 86 F, not below 68 F or over 95 F. What sort of character would choose such an animal companion? What sort of household might own four dogs, six cats, one parrot, and a tortoise?
BIG TAKE-AWAY FOR WRITERS
Think carefully before you throw one or more animals into your story. Consider the role of the animal(s), and the fit between your character and the fictional animal(s). And then have fun with it!
P.S. FYI,January 14th is Dress Up Your Pet Day. Work that tidbit into your story!
The fact that it really happened doesn’t mean it’s good story material.
Writers often use details and specifics to weave in richness and a sense of reality. So you might be tempted to mention Richmond, Virginia’s recent weather–Japanese cherry trees and hyacinths blooming in December–
–a temperature in the upper 70s on Christmas Eve, a rosebud or daffodil sprouts in January.
But unless unseasonably warm weather is part of your plot line, DON’T DO IT.
Details that are atypical but irrelevant are likely to take readers out of the story while they stop to think it over. Even worse, they might conclude that you don’t know what you are talking about–thus accomplishing the opposite of your intent!
The basis of conflict and tension are obvious when two (or more) characters are competing for the same goal, such as a promotion, or when a character is beset by physical danger such as a life-threatening cancer or an approaching hurricane. A threat of any sort to the character or to someone (or something) the character cares about is an excellent source of conflict and tension. But using internal conflicts can add just as much power to your plot.
You can’t have your cake and eat it, too = approach-approach conflict
The character has multiple appealing options but can take only one—e.g., two marriage proposals, only one dessert from a tray of twelve, only one new car, etc. This type of conflict creates the least tension because there is no real downside. It’s all good.
Approach-approach conflict: the character has multiple appealing options
Between a rock and a hard place = between the devil and the deep blue sea = an avoidance-avoidance conflict
Will the character get back surgery or live with the pain? Wash the car or rake leaves? Stay in an unhappy marriage or get a divorce? The reader may feel more sympathy than tension. The level of tension depends partly on the pain the character suffers while weighing the alternatives, and partly on how bad the options are. For example, Sophie’s Choice: to save herself and one child at the price of choosing to send one child to the gas chamber, or refuse to choose and sentence all three of them to death.
Avoidance-avoidance conflict: the character is between a rock and a hard place
Take the bitter with the sweet = an approach-avoidance conflict: one goal with both positive and negative aspects, ultimately resolved in favor of the stronger
Virtually all relationships as well as many other aspects of life fall into this category. One factor affecting the amount of conflict or tension is how nearly the positive and negative aspects are matched (the closer they are in strength, the greater the tension). If an otherwise perfect spouse has one annoying habit, probably no big deal, the marriage is solid; if a buyer is drawn to a white picket fence but the house is practically falling down and overpriced, no-sale is a pretty safe bet. But if a deeply flawed spouse has nearly as many annoying habits as good ones—if the house is in a perfect location with a great school district and enough yard for the seven dogs—it could be a game changer. Comparable positives and negatives will create lots of tension.
A second factor is how important the ultimate outcome is. If I want a Ph.D. to qualify for a college professorship but don’t want to spend the time, effort, and money to go for it—not to mention the risk of failure—big decision, lots of tension potential. If I want a bag of chips from the vending machine but think $2 is an outrageous price—not much tension.
The positive (which pulls the character to approach) and the negative (which pushes the character to avoid) are what psychologists call “valences.” Both diminish with distance—time, physical distance, space. Something far away will affect the character’s immediate behavior and feelings less than something that is imminent.
Love and approach-avoidance conflicts
Love is always a high-voltage relationship, so let’s consider the special instances of approach-avoidance conflicts reflected in absence makes the heart grow fonder; out of sight, out of mind; and can’t live with ’em, can’t live without ’em.
Absence makes the heart go fonder when, with distance, the negative qualities or aspects of the date/lover/spouse exert less influence and the push-away diminishes; the person doesn’t seem so bad. If you aren’t actually hearing the obnoxious laugh, smelling the bad breath, or arguing about politics, the heart grows fonder—though maybe not fond enough to renew the relationship.
Out of sight, out of mind is the opposite: positive value diminishes with distance until the original attraction may have no more pull at all. The sweet kisses don’t mean so much when you aren’t getting any! Ditto sense of humor, help with chores, being a good listener. This is often the source of the “Dear John” letters received by people in the military, in prison, in college far away, etc.
In terms of conflict and tension, can’t live with ’em and can’t live without ’em is the best. One brief detour into psychology: negative valence declines more sharply than positive valence. Soooo, when both valences are significant, the case sometimes evolves in which the sharp decline in the negative crosses the slower decline in the positive valence.
Approach-avoidance conflict: the character must weigh the positive and negative aspects
The point where the valences cross is the point of vacillation: closer, and the relationship is so negative that one or both parties withdraw. With greater distance, the positive stays strong longer than the negative and the couple gets back together. These yo-yo relationships can go on for years. This could happen with any type of relationship—playmates to spouses. Whole books have been written by and about couples who marry, divorce, and remarry.
Takeaway for writers
Good writers need to be good psychologists whether or not they ever studied the discipline or use the lingo, just be sure the positives and the negatives are believable for the character and appropriate to the conflict.
Second takeaway
Characters in conflict within themselves can provide plenty of page-turner tension!
In recent blogs, I talked about toxic mother-daughter relationships, toxic relationships in general, and toxic people.Toxic anything is good for writers! But once you’ve introduced these negative relationships and people, you cannot—satisfactorily—leave your reader wondering why s/he puts up with that. After all, there are planes, trains, and automobiles—not to mention boots that are made for walking!
Even if your characters don’t recognize their motives, you—their almighty creator—should know what they are AND should let the reader know.
So, why does s/he put up with it? The short answer is, it’s the best perceived alternative! People are very rational creatures, and they always make that choice. The complexity here is in the word perceived. Not everyone sees a situation the same way.
For example, the objective reality might be that a battered woman would be better off out of that marriage. But if she doesn’t see that, it ain’t gonna happen. So consider what her point of view might be. Suppose she came from a family with spousal abuse and accepts it as part of the package. Perhaps she fears for her life, or the safety of her children, if she leaves and he finds her. What if he threatened to commit suicide if she leaves and she couldn’t stand the guilt? Maybe she thinks it’s her fault—and/or, her self-esteem is so low that she thinks she deserves it. Maybe she doesn’t see a way to keep a roof over her/their children’s heads and food on the table single. Perhaps she loves him and lets him beat her because for his own twisted reasons, he needs to do so. Perhaps leaving/divorce goes against her religious beliefs. Etc. All of these reflect beliefs or values not universally held—andbeliefs or values not universally held often apply to perceptions about leaving a toxic situation or relationship.
Additionally, consider the legal constraints on minors, military personnel, prisoners, employees, etc.
Perhaps your character is highly motivated to avoid conflict, criticism, gossip, embarrassment, rejection by family or peers—or even fears the unknown.
True? True—in your writing if not in your life. You may recall that last month I wrote about the types of toxic mother/daughter relationships, and how the patterns could hold regardless of who the two people are. You’ll find that this blog is related.
Lillian Glass profiled 30 types of toxic terrors, and just the labels are thought-provoking: cut-you-downer, chatterbox, self-destroyer, runner, silent but deadly volcano, gossip angry pugilist, gloom and doom victim, smiling two-faced backstabber, wishy-washy wimp, opportunistic user; bitchy, bossy bully; jokester, unconscious social klutz, mental case, bullshitting liar, meddler, penny-pinching miser, fanatic; me, myself, and I narcissist; Eddie Haskell, self-righteous priss, snooty snob, competitor, control freak, accusing critic, arrogant know-it-all, emotional refrigerator, skeptical paranoid, instigator.
Toxic People by Lillian Glass
Translating this into writing: the presence of a toxic character immediately raises tension and conflict. That is their role, to make other people’s lives miserable. But spread the glory: don’t make one character carry the entire burden of toxicity. Consider a couple, apparently happy together but each toxic to other people in different ways.
Glass’s book is basically a self-help book, so she also offers 10 techniques for handling toxic people: tension-blowout (deep breathing), humor, stop-the-thought, mirror (reflecting the behavior back), direct confrontation, calm questioning, give-them-hell-and-yell, give-them-love-and-kindness, vicarious-fantasy, unplug (the person from your life).
Translating this into writing: have your characters deal with the toxic person(s) in different ways, with varying degrees of success. And the inappropriate behaviors that she advises you never to do in real life (e.g., physical violence) are perfectly appropriate—and often effective—in achieving your writerly goals.
Glass offers an exercise for identifying the types of people who drive the reader nuts. As the author, you could complete this exercise for your main characters. Identifying the consistencies might even provide insights about how to make your character(s) richer and more real.
My edition of the book was published in 1997, but toxic people are timeless! This and several of her other books are available on Amazon, and I urge you to consider whether it would be helpful to you.
Happy birthday, Marine Corps! On this date in 1775, the Marine Corps was established. Originally a division of the Navy, it became a separate branch of the military on July 11, 1789. One image imprinted on the national consciousness is the photo of five U.S. Marines and one U.S. Navy hospital corpsman raising the Stars and Stripes on Iwo Jima during WWII.
Not a national holiday, but coming the day before Veterans Day, flags are often flying for the Marines as well. Character considerations: does your character fly a flag year-round, on holidays, or not at all? Why?
Speaking of Veterans Day, this one’s enjoyed a twisted history. The fighting of WWI—known at the time as “The Great War”—ceased when an armistice took effect between the Allied nations and Germany. It went into effect on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month—the end of the war to end all wars—in 1918. In November 1919, President Wilson proclaimed November the first commemoration of Armistice Day. In 1926, the U.S. Congress officially recognized November 11, 1918, as the end of WWI and urged people to observe the day in schools and churches, or other suitable places, with appropriate ceremonies. In 1938, it became a legal holiday—dedicated to the cause of world peace.
As we all know, WWI did not end all wars. Following WWII, in 1954, President Eisenhower signed the bill changing the name of Armistice Day to Veterans Day.
And then there was the issue of dates. In 1968, the Uniform Holiday Bill was signed into law, intended to ensure three-day weekends for Federal employees. The holidays affected were Washington’s Birthday, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and Columbus Day. Confusion ran rampant when Veterans Day was celebrated on October 25, 1971, and many states and organizations observed the original date. The disaffection was so strong that President Ford signed a law returning the annual observance to November 11.
Character considerations: is your character patriotic? By whose definition? How would your character have responded to the renaming of the day, the changing dates, and the changing nature of the celebrations?
When you think about it, writing fodder is everywhere. Think about it!
Frangibility is a characteristic typically applied to objects, but think about it for your character. An object is said to be frangible if it is easily broken into fragments, as opposed to deforming elastically and retaining its cohesion as a single object. Does your character change or endure regardless of possible physical or emotional deformity?
Manufacturers often make objects frangible by design—for example, easily breakable in case of emergency or accident, to provide easy access or escape. Consider how being frangible might be beneficial to your character.
On the other hand, frangible toys are not suitable for young children. And one of the most frequent areas of intentional frangibilityis in ammunition, for bullets that do the most damage. How might a frangible character do the most damage in your story? What if that character is a parent? What if s/he is a child? How would that be different if an only child or one with siblings?
Ask the same sorts of questions about characters who might warp but who basically remain who they always were.
Which sort of character does your story need to up the conflict, raise the stakes, and grab the reader? Do you need a cracker or a slice of fresh bread?
Saturday and Sunday were two great, packed, informative days! By the end of the Library of Virginia’s Annual Literary Luncheon, I was too caught up in events to write much, but that dam is about to break.
I’ve attended JRW Conferences since the earliest days, back when they were held at the Library of Virginia. I really liked that venue, the ambience, the close, personal feel of it. But the annual meeting outgrew the Library’s space. This year we met at the Greater Richmond Convention Center. It feels much more sterile, but there is plenty of room for meetings, plenary sessions, book signings and sales, plus convenient parking. Plenty of room for growth!
Let me say up front that the absolutely worst thing about JRWC is that I couldn’t attend every session. For example, on Saturday the concurrent sessions offered from 3:30-4:30 were How to Locate, Lure, and Land the Right Agent; To MFA or Not to MFA (virtues and vices of the academic route); Writing Diversity into Your Fiction (representing the larger world in your fiction, how and why); and 50 Shades of Red (on various aspects of writing erotica). What writer wouldn’t want to know all of that? (Well, maybe the kids/YA writers could skip the erotica.)
On the other hand, last week I mentioned that JRW classifies sessions by track. This year’s tracks were Diversity in Writing, Writing for Kids/YA, Poetry, The Pillars of Story, and Writing as Career 2.0. I tended toward The Pillars of Story, but not exclusively. Freedom to jump the tracks is one of the delights of the conference.
Hoping to find an agent for Nettie’s Books soon, I attended the session on getting the right agent (David Henry Sterry, Arielle Eckstut, Heather Flaherty, and Helen Heller, Bill Blume moderating). Although there was a lot of diversity on many things, (e.g., appropriate level of formality/informality) two areas of unanimity stand out: (1) research agents you intend to query; and (2) follow their online submission guidelines to the letter! The diversity of personalities on the panel was evidence that you (the writer) really should try to get a handle on your prospective agent as a person. Places to look are Facebook, blogs, Twitter, and any books the agent might have written. It also helps to hear them speak at a conference such as JRW, or meet them in a one-on-one session.
I’m currently working on a new novel, and the first 30 pages or so are pretty ho-hum. The presentation on conflict and tension was excellent (Raising the Stakes with Leah Ferguson, Valley Haggard, and Amy Sue Nathan, moderated by Jon Sealy). They reminded me of multiple aspects of tension and conflict: stakes can be personal or universal; conflict can be internal or external; a blocked goal = conflict; focus on physical or emotional danger; in every case, imagine the worst possible thing that could realistically happen in this situation and write it—you can always dial it back later for nuance. One thing I found especially helpful was Valley Haggard’s comment that readers connect with shame, pain, vulnerability, failure, and flaws. I wish I had a picture!
A Fine Romance (Leah Ferguson, Mary Chris Escobar, Amy Sue Nathan, moderated by M.M.Finck) brought genre into focus—women’s fiction vs. romance, into particular—and endings (happily ever after, happily for now, together but bittersweet because one or both had to sacrifice for it). Beyond that, what struck me is that their advice for writing a good romance or book of women’s fiction sounded just like the advice for good writing in general! Which reminds me: at the Festival of the Written Word, I’m on a panel with a title something like When Romance Meets Mystery. We shall see. Again, I wish I had a photo, but I was too far back in the hall.
But I did get a picture of the panel for Writing Memorable Characters: Stacy Hawkins Adams, Bruce Holsinger, Amy Sue Nathan, Kristina Wright, moderated by Josh Cane.
L-R: Josh Cane, Amy Sue Nathan, Stacy Hawkins Adams, Kristina Wright, Bruce Holsinger
The variety of writing represented—inspirational women’s fiction and non-fiction, historical fiction, women’s fiction and romance, erotica—underscored the over-all rule that every type of writing (including memoir) needs memorable characters, and characters the reader cares about. The heroes and heroines need flaws. The bad characters need a good side. And one effective way of establishing both is to give readers the backstory.
The last plenary session was the Pitchapalooza (David Henry Sterry, Arielle Eckstut, and Rebecca Podos) during which the names of volunteers were drawn from a plastic pumpkin and each had 1 minute—precisely one minute!—to pitch his/her book. Great fun, and very informative as the panel commented on the stronger and weaker aspects of each pitch.
L-R: Rebecca Podos, Arielle Eckstut, David Henry Sterry
The closing was brief, but celebrated the winners of the Best Unpublished Novel Contest, the Emyl Jenkins Award, and Pitchapalooza. Although not a winner, I was recognized as a finalist in the Best Unpublished Novel Contest. Very gratifying. But egocentric being that I am, I wish the awards (except Pitchapalooza, of course) had been announced a the beginning of the conference. Maybe people I didn’t know before would have congratulated me!
Alas, the conference wasn’t all about me. It was mostly about the books—and there were many to be had, and signed. Fountain Bookstore sold the books of all the presenters.
Fountain Bookstore selling speakers’ books at James River Writers Conference
I usually come away from the JRWC feeling that I got more than I paid for. Unfortunately, this year, that included a raging cold, including coughing and congestion, that laid me low as of Monday morning. I assume it was all the back-slapping, handshaking, and hugging.
The “Lucy Booth” at the James River Writers Conference where writers could meet with a professional psychologist
On the other hand, a nasty cold was a great reason to put my feet up, review my notes, and enjoy the contents of my conference bag. I checked the writing classes offered by VMFA Studio School and the Visual Arts Center; considered invitations to submit to the next Poetry Virginia Annual contest and join the Virginia Writers Club; and I could browse the free issues of Richmond Magazine and Broad Street. Already looking forward to next year! Though I did suggest to Katharine Herndon (JRW Executive Director) that next year they try to get a bright colored conference bag!
James River Writers Conference tote bag with Different Drummer postcard
Janet Burroway once said, “In literature, only trouble is interesting.” Trouble is the source of tension, conflict, struggle, etc. And what better source of trouble than characters caught in toxic relationships.
The Psychology Today website published a blog by Peg Streep titled, “8 Types of Toxic Patterns in Mother-Daughter Relationships.” (Yes, I know that scholars consider Psych Today to be pretty light-weight. I’m a card-carrying psychologist myself. But I like Psych Today. It isn’t intended to be a scholarly journal. It is a magazine for the public, and often prints what’s trending. And if a writer creates great fiction on a faulty premise, who cares?) But back to the main point. Streep labeled eight types of unattuned and unloving mothers:
Dismissive
Controlling
Unavailable
Enmeshed
Combative
Unreliable
Self-involved
Role-reversal
The labels are pretty indicative of the toxicity described. Read the actual blog. The good news for writers is that these toxic relationships needn’t be limited to toxic mothers and vulnerable daughters. (You may recognize here an echo of what I said about Deborah Tannen’s analysis of mother-daughter communication patterns: what one says isn’t necessarily what the other hears could apply to virtually any long-germ relationship.) In this instance, consider toxic relationships between husbands and wives. Consider boss and subordinate. Consider role reversal in that it’s the daughter who is toxic.
Every writer wants—or should want—to create characters who are vivid, interesting, and memorable. My advice is to choose a quirky interest that will allow you to illuminate various aspects of your character’s character.
Take turtles, for example. You’ll recall from my blog posts on August 15 and August 22, I have an affinity for Eastern box turtles. I enjoy them in situ. When I discovered the male turtle I’d encountered periodically over the past few years in the middle of the cul de sac in front of my house, smooshed by a car, I went into a funk. Two days later, I found a baby turtle—about the size of a fifty-cent coin, so new its shell was still flexible—I felt both joy and concern. I picked it up from the sidewalk and released it on the bank behind my house. The next day, I saw a baby turtle smooshed in a driveway across the street. I cried. Was it “my” turtle or a clutch mate? Should I have moved it from the sidewalk to grass closer to where it might have been trying to go? More recently, I found this male turtle on the bank behind my house— younger, I think, than the one that died. Suddenly, the world looked brighter again.
Consider a fictional character with a turtle interest, then answer a few questions. Is it a house turtle or turtles in the wild? What might either answer reveal about your character? Much can be gleaned from how a person interacts with a pet. We’re more familiar with dogs and cats, maybe birds; how might interacting with a turtle be similar and different? Where did the interest in turtles come from?
Does the turtle hold some symbolic importance for your character? Turtle symbolism includes order, creation, patience, strength, stability, longevity, innocence, endurance, and protection.
Does the turtle interest originate in cultural or ethnic roots? The symbolism of turtles varies widely around the world, so do a little research depending on the ethnic heritage of your character: Africa, Egypt, ancient Mesopotamia, Greece, ancient Rome, Malaysia, China, India, Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, North America, South America, Tahiti, Polynesia.
Or maybe it’s an interest in turtles in specific venues: folklore, literature, children’s books, films and television, even video games. If you want to get really esoteric, make it an interest in turtles on old coins, flags, or heraldry.
Much as I favor turtles, they are not the only rich way to quirk your character. My favorite all-purpose symbolism reference—animals, dates, numbers, plants, etc.—is The Penguin Dictionary of Symbols.
Sometimes a more specialized examination of symbols is appropriate.
I once wrote a short story titled “Speak to Me” in which the main character is a woman who carves grave stones and communicates with her anonymous lover through the symbols of flowers and funerary art. (This story appeared in Apalachee Review, Number 56, 2006, and is reprinted in the Different Drummer collection.)
Big take-away for writers
Get beyond fiddling with hair or popping gum and choose a rich quirk for your character. If it’s a novel, you are going to be spending a lot of time together, and if you aren’t interested, neither will your reader be!
