Similar Posts

  • “A Few Things Writers Can Learn from Harry Potter” by Cheryl Klein

    ByJohn Brown

    Klein (isn’t that a lovely photo with the arch, the girl, and the color? It feels Potterish and is perfect for Klein) is a senior editor at Arthur A. Levine Books, an imprint of Scholastic Inc. (Levine is the guy who purchased Potter in the US), and the continuity editor for the U.S. editions of the Harry Potter books. A “continuity editor” is responsible for ensuring that the world an author creates remains as consistent as possible through multiple books. A senior editor, on the other hand, finds likely books and acquires them for publication.

    Please look at this list of best selling books of all time. Rowling’s success is simply AMAZING. And Klein looks, as an editor, at some reasons why she feels Potter did so well. Of course, there are other factors like the fact that it was a book the whole family could enjoy and the wonder she created with things like quidditch and every flavor beans etc. But the points she makes here are marvelous. Take some time to think about and digest what Klein has to say. For more essays, here’s her website: http://www.cherylklein.com/.

    Share

  • Rewriting the On Writing page

    ByJohn Brown

    I’m a teacher in the private sector. I’ve developed and taught courses on everything from accounting to how to small talk. Heck, my official title is education program manager (that sounds really official and, like, powerful, doesn’t it).

    For a long time, I’ve wanted to deliver a 12 week course on writing. But I ain’t got not time for 12 weeks and all that would require. However, that doesn’t mean I can’t turn my education brain on and get my stuff on writing into a format that will actually help.

    So that’s what I’m going to do.

    You want to learn how to write?

    I’ll share what I can. The first revision is up. In it, you should learn what the crap you’re doing. Enjoy.

    When I finish more, I’ll be sure to notify you with a post.

    Share
  • |

    John guests on Writing Excuses season 3 episode 18

    ByJohn Brown

    writing-excuses-the-guys2-300x139

    Here’s the second episode I recorded with the Writing Excuses guys.

    In the first podcast we talked about putting and not putting ourselves in our writing and making characters who don’t all sound like the author. In this one, we talked about how to not repeat ourselves in ways that make the reader feel like they’re getting the same old same old.

    As usual, the guys had some great insights. Check it out: How to Not Repeat Yourself.

    Share

  • The Three Rules of Great Antagonists?

    ByJohn Brown

    Jennifer Crusie is a long-time pro writer. In Filled with Glee: The Unauthorized Glee Companion by Leah Wilson, Crusie had this to say about antagonists in her essay “You Think That’s Hard? Try Being an Antagonist, That’s Hard”: Why Sue Sylvester is Essential to Glee” 

    “Sue is riveting, not only because she’s a fascinating character in her own right, but also because she embodies the Three Rules of Great Antagonists: (1) She is much stronger than the protagonist she sets out to destroy, (2) She will stop at nothing to achieve her goal, and (3) despite all that strength and implacability, she’s a vulnerable human being, not a cartoon.” (130)

    You know what I think of rules and of form outside the context of function. So here are my questions to you writers who follow my blog and have been following the posts on suspense:

    1. What function or effect do these qualities have on the reader or on story elements that impact the reader?
    2. Do all great antagonists exhibit these three qualities?
    3. If not, are any of these critical for antagonists?
    4. What’s your conclusion about these three rules?

    I’m interested to see what you come up with. And don’t be afraid to post your ideas. I really want to hear your take. You might want to read her whole essay.

    Share
  • |

    Will readers completely die off?

    ByJohn Brown

    For many years people have been predicting the death of literature because the stats on the reading public  show fewer and fewer books are being sold because fewer people are reading. For an author it’s a bit depressing. However, you might find this article provides some hope: http://www.newsweek.com/id/136961.

    Generation R (R Is for Reader)
    The book business may be flat, but there’s at least one bright spot: the booming sales of books for teens–and no, it’s not all Harry Potter… Contrary to the depressing proclamations that American teens aren’t reading, the surprising truth is they are reading novels in unprecedented numbers. Young-adult fiction (ages 12-18) is enjoying a bona fide boom with sales up more than 25 percent in the past few years, according to a Children’s Book Council sales survey…”

    If that trend holds, it means we’ll have a fine wave of readers to replace all of us who die off, and then some. Someone praise JK Rowling for Hogwarts and for awakening pleasure reading in the hearts of children (and adults).

    And take it as a lesson. The future is in the next generation. Perhaps reading provides just as much entertainment as anything else. The kids just have to discover it.

    Hopefully, Nellie will be doing her part to awaken that joy in the hearts of the marvelous youth of our small town. As I wrote before, she’s going to be following the steps of Nancie Atwell who has done amazing things for 20+ years up in Maine.

    http://www.amazon.com/Middle-Understanding-Writing-Learning-Workshop/dp/0867093749
    http://www.c-t-l.org/about.html

    It’s all about reading and writing for the intrinsic joy of reading and writing. Only 15 minutes of her 65 minute class will be spent in traditional lecture. The rest is for the kids to read and write. This isn’t study hall. It’s rigorous. And again, it follows the principles I learned in my last 20 years of teaching and learning how to write.

    I cannot wait to see what happens this fall!

    Share

  • Can you write for love AND money?

    ByJohn Brown

    Many artists think you can’t. And not simply because they envy those who are selling hundreds of thousands of copies.

    The reason they think this is for the simple fact that the creative process is fueled by following the zing. It’s ruled by passion. You have to care about AND believe in what you’re writing. You have to because if you think it’s boring or unbelivable, then it’s likely everyone else will as well. 

    For example, let’s say you are deeply bored by vampires, but see that vampire love stories are making piles of cash and decide to write about one with smoldering eyes and a bad habit of chewing tobacco even though it leads to dental problems with the fangs (hey, why would her man-toy care?), then you’re substituting passion (that which springs up from within) for graphs and plots about marektability (stuff that’s imposed from without).

    And so many folks think that there’s a continuum. On one end is writing for passion. On the other is writing for money. And the two don’t cross. But this is a false dichotomy. The truth is that money and passion are independent factors.

    Lon Prater, a writer friend, recently expressed it this way.

    Not a dichotomy, but rather an X and Y axis, the way I see it.

    There’s:

    low love, low money (SEO writing?)

    low love, high money (For me, this would be tech writing, or media tie-in to a universe I didn’t care about)

    high love, low money (unfortunately too much of my writing!)

    high love, high money. (Loftiest of goals) 🙂

    You can find datapoints for every quadrant, and of course “love” is highly subjective and individualized, as are what counts as low and high for each writer.

    If we put labels to the quadrants, we get something like this, along with common emotions they tend to evoke in other writers. (Although I will say that envy seems to want to run amok in the author quadrant as well.) 

    writer-love-and-money-quadrants2

    Share

4 Comments

  1. Good article. I just finished reading “Story” by Robert McKee, which it reminded me of in a lot of ways.

  2. It IS good.

    However, one thing it’s missing is surprise. Stories thrive on the unexpected disaster and twist. It’s also missing the fact that the disasters are often yes-but turns. So many times it looks as if the hero actually succeeds, but we find out very soon they haven’t. And “problem” isn’t quite enough. Any old problem won’t do. It has to be a problem that meets certain criteria. Still, it’s an excellent article. For the basic basics, it’s perfect.

Comments are closed.