Category Archives: Writing Theory & Techniques

Reasoning, warnings, perspectives, methodology, and other theoretical nonsense

Revenge Plotting: When Revenge Doesn’t Have Plot Points

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

What do you do when you realize your antihero’s revenge isn’t just an embellishment, it’s the plot of your novel?

Why, look up revenge plotting resources, to make sure you hit all the main points, of course. Until you find out there aren’t any.

Revenge is a trope readers and viewers know well. Classic examples are William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the Jason Bourne movie series, and the TV show, Revenge. Clearly, the revenge trope can overtake an entire plot. So, why has no one converted the Hero’s Journey or the traditional plot arc into a map for writers to follow?

My best guess is it’s because revenge is an emotional motivation, and most people aren’t brave enough or foolish enough to try to logic out a string of emotions into a plan. Yet, isn’t that the essence of a revenge story? Isn’t that what the protagonist is doing in their head every step of the way?

The setup only gets worse when you’re writing a Revenge Romance. How can the setup of a known trope, in such a definitive genre, be so blurry?

Here is what articles have said:

  • Essential Archetypes: Victim, Villain, Avenger
  • The protagonist has to become an outlaw for the sake of revenge
  • The Victim died
  • The law doesn’t work; justice is not served
  • The Victim’s death is the inciting incident
  • Show the hero’s normal life before the victimizing event
  • Make the reader feel like the protagonist is in the right and their actions are justified, even if not admirable
  • Revenge plots are a function of Thrillers
  • Use the Villain as a foil to the Avenger
  • Successful revenge ends in death, likely for the protagonist

I’m no expert, but those points seem to be ignoring some things.

Here’s why that doesn’t work:

  • The offender (Villain) is now an unwitting Victim
  • The Avenger is the Victim, and is turning into the Villain of another character’s story
  • A non-Avenger Victim doesn’t have to be dead; they could be kidnapped, they could have been forced to marry another, they could be seriously impaired mentally or physically, or they could have gotten over their trauma in a way the Avenger cannot
  • Revenge tropes show up in every genre, with Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Romance in particular inviting revenge as a motivator
  • An administrator of Law could use the law to take revenge
  • Justice could be served by another character, but the Avenger’s grudge is personal and therefore not resolved
  • As proven by the Revenge TV series, revenge may be most effective when working from within, rather than being hindered by outlaw status
  • Depicting the Avenger’s lost normal life at the beginning of the novel might mean starting the story too early, which is the bane of publishers’ existence and not why readers are picking up a revenge novel; you’re just giving people something to skip
  • Killing off the protagonist in a Revenge Romance makes the story a Tragedy
  • If the Avenger is set up to get revenge on their not-yet-Love-Interest, the ending may not be satisfying, and may even undercut the rest of the story’s progression
  • If you have to convince the reader that your morally grey Avenger is serving true justice, they’re not; revenge is about personal satisfaction from within one’s own means and an attempt at practical closure, not about the existence and efficacy of justice as an abstract idea
  • Enemies-to-Lovers makes this theory crumble to pieces

Every time I have mentioned Revenge Romance, somebody asks if I meant Enemies to Lovers.

No, I did not. I said what I meant.

Revenge Romance vs. Enemies to Lovers

  • Enemies to Lovers implies each party sees the other as an enemy to get revenge upon. Mutual destruction is assured, unless one bests the other first or both fall in love simultaneously. Think Romeo and Juliet.
  • Revenge Romance only necessitates one party see the other as an enemy. One character could be blissfully unaware that the other is targeting them, or could have no desire to fight the Avenger even when antagonized. There is also a greater likelihood that revenge methods could be curbed by slowly-softening characters to lead to more humiliating, more redemptive, less lethal solutions.
    • I’ve begun reading Shanna by Kathleen Woodiwiss to explore this a bit deeper.

Revenge Romance in BKC

If you were helping me critique The BeastKing Chronicles previously, you probably noticed that Rome pulled some jerk moves because he was self-consumed and misguided. But sometimes, those motives were also skewed as a response to what Labriella had done to him in the past.

In the first couple versions of the story, Rome came out hot tempered and emotionally resistant, while still thinking sensually. His temper, and his catch-and-release cycle, drove Labriella nuts and stunted the story progression. The next couple versions of the story integrated the suddenness of a predator who waits, then snarls and suddenly pounces. Anybody would be afraid of a predator, even an old childhood friend, and so is Labriella, though she still cares about the man she knows beneath.

But what came out, in the private moments between the two characters, was a tit-for-tat vie for acceptance of which of them was right about what their relationship should be. In the back of Rome’s mind was always the sight of Labriella’s back, fading into the distance, leaving him alone again, and the urge to make sure she paid for that mistake. As the story progressed, Rome’s tactics for making her pay backfired, and he found himself caught in his own trap with sensual desires he didn’t know could cripple him.

That may have been what was in the back of Rome’s mind, but in the back of my mind was the worry that it could take a whole book unto itself to reconcile Rome’s starting disposition with Labriella’s disposition toward him—possibly even a whole story arc. That was when I realized: Rome’s revenge mindset, or at least his initial hurt, needs to be dealt with before the end of the temple repossession arc. Book 1 already needed to be shortened. The best solution may be to let his revenge play out in Book 1…and bite him in the butt.

Realigning with Characters’ Feelings

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

I’ve been trying to jump back into writing my story, and in so doing, I’ve had to come back to a method that I’ve employed time and time again. I thought maybe, for the sake of other writers who are in the same sort of situation, I should share some advice:

If you think you can jump back into your story after a length of absence, and pick it up right where you left off, don’t. You may be able to. But that’s not the problem. The problem is that you think you remember all that your characters have been through, but you don’t. You remember the facts, the events, the flat progression.

You don’t remember your characters’ feelings.

If you’re like me, the last thing you want to do is go back and reread all of your work thus far to give yourself a clue. It’s too time-consuming. You’ll be tempted to go back and do revisions instead of writing new material. Your writing style has changed since then, and you can’t match it.

My solution?

Take a piece of paper and a pen, and start jotting down the key points of what your characters have been through recently, in chronological order. If you’re totally clueless, you could try starting at the beginning. But if you were in the middle of writing a building-block scene or a significant event, start with the beginning of that event. For instance, I left off 4-5 days into a weeklong party in my story—a party which will have a rather drastic culmination. So I glanced over my chapter titles, and skim-scrolled down my story document from the first party chapter, and began writing bullet points of emotion-driving moments that stuck out as changes from the characters’ previous thoughts or actions.

In other words, I’m tracking character development through the most recent progression of events.

You don’t have to write down things like “he was angry” or “she was jealous,” but your bullet points should bring such things to mind when you see them. Like, “she saw him kissing another girl” brings to mind a bunch of emotions the character should be feeling (i.e. jealousy, loss, a sense of urgency to fix it, etc.).

The purpose of the bullet points is to bring your own emotional scale into line with that of your characters. You felt with them once. You need to feel with them again. If you saw your love interest kissing a girl who was a complete stranger at a party, you would feel ___. If someone offered a pleasant distraction from your girlfriend making out with another guy, you would be ___ if she condemned you for accepting it.

Do you see where I’m going with this?

It’s not enough to jump back into the plotline events. You have to realign yourself so you can breathe in sync with your characters. Only then can you feel out what needs to happen next to move things along.

Hope that helps you as much as it helped me.

Workshop Help: Information vs. Perspective

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

I recently realized I hadn’t updated my Volume 1 info page. Whoops. Fixed that.

As I mentioned before, I’ve been dragging my heels in my writing a bit because I signed up for some online writing workshops.

“Do those really help?”

Yes and no. There’s always the stuff you already know from experience, the stuff you’ve already researched, and the stuff you can’t figure out how to assimilate. The farther along you are in your writing, the more narrowed your focus. For instance, I now know that I am writing an antihero (as opposed to a Prince Charming or an epic hero), and my Fantasy story’s plot decided it wants to be a Romance. So every time I read advice about what a hero should and shouldn’t have, and what they should and shouldn’t do, I’m seeing it through a Romance/Antihero lens. I take some things, and I toss the rest. What to take vs. what to toss is the pivotal question. My male counterpart is an Antihero, he’s discreetly muscled and slimly built, and I loathe irrelevant book covers, so I automatically dismiss the idea of having a book cover image depicting a headless muscly chest, and I’m going to ignore any advice on how to make him extra-fluffy lovable. On the other hand, he’s damaged with a past, I want readers to be sympathetic, and I’ve got to get my heroine (and my readers) to fall for him. So I’m more than happy to take advice about how to write in his sexy quirks every couple lines, and build questions and intrigue through his actions and reactions.

Information is what is helpful in these workshops. It’s authors handing you tools. It’s social connections. And it’s awareness of your contemporaries and the current book market.

Perspective is a totally different issue. The best perspective help I’ve had volunteered actually comes from readers in the genre, down to the subgenre and the sub-subgenre. There’s no substitute for it. Readers intrinsically know what they’re looking for in a subgenre—or rather, they can tell whether what they’re looking for is or isn’t present. Some readers will just drift away if they feel your story is lacking. But other readers will leave a line or two—or even a few paragraphs—if they know you’re interested in what they have to say.

So I’d like to say “thank you” to those readers who reviewed my most recent chapter, and those who have reviewed my story in the past. Also, a special “thank you” to those readers who reviewed multiple versions of my story. It is your comments I keep in mind when I revise, and when I try to figure out where to write to next. It is your comments that I use to write myself out of corners. And your comments have helped make me a better writer. Don’t think that your one little nay-saying comment is not heard inside a bunch of yay’s, or vice versa. I know I have cut scenes some of you liked, but don’t think I’ve deleted them. They’re still here, waiting to be added back in.

That being said, I am slowly realizing that all of my focus on the “right” ways to do things in order to get published has both helped and stunted my writing. I’ve been outlining and re-outlining, trying to figure out where to go next. That’s necessary, at certain stages. But I’m looking at two more events before the end of the second book, and realizing my writing went so much faster when I just free-wrote. Sure, I wrote myself into a bunch of corners. Sure, I had a bunch of adverbs and repetitive sentence structures. But I also chalked scenes full of emotion and used them as catalysts for unexpected plot turns…and I did it without hardly thinking about it. I just followed my pen. The next revision I have in mind for my manuscript is actually way closer to my original plot ideas, because my story has taken on a life of its own and thus far I have opted to blindly follow it, into whatever unexpected turmoil my pen may lead. I’m not sure which is better to publish: the original plot, or the raw, character-charged emotional turns of events. But with the end of the second book finally taking shape, I think I might just throw myself into it. After all, that’s where all the limes are going to hit the fan.

The second event at the end of this book, I was actually considering moving to the end of the first book. But now I’m not so sure. I guess I’ll figure it out after it’s written. After all, no matter which order events fall in for these two books, events in the next portion of the story should progress the same.

I don’t know if I will go right into writing and posting the next book after I finish Book 2. I might, if I have momentum. But it seems like a great breaking point for revisions.

Anyway, I’m finishing up a Male P.O.V. workshop by Sascha Illyvich (previously entitled “Inside the Male Mind”). I’m starting in on a Romance Writers of America workshop called “Killer Openings” by Alexa Bourne, which should help with the revisions I’ve been toying with for the beginning of my series. I’m also attending a one-night class on publishing and a seminar about characters this month. After those, my two-month workshop madness will be complete. It’s quite the marathon, and it can be difficult to switch back and forth between question mode, social mode, revision mode, and writing mode. Who knew authors had to be such multi-taskers? But after that, it should slow down…and my writing should pick back up. Theoretically.

Chapter 12 is underway; don’t think I’ve forgotten about it just ’cause I’m in a workshop frenzy. I’ve spent a lot of time mulling it over, attempting outlines, and brainstorming specific prospective scenes. I’m being careful, because recent discussions about bondage and alphas has helped me see how important it is that I handle the details of Lord Alonza’s party the right way. Rome may be dominant, but it is very important that you (my dear readers) see that his brand of dominance distinguishes itself that of the corrupt nobility—that they’re about a lot of things that he’s not. I believe the best way to do that is to stick Rome in a noble-dominant situation, and contrast his desires (and how he handles them) within the same situation.

I should warn you, though: Some bad crap is going to happen to Labriella. And, Sheryl, you’re right; Labriella has been growing more timid. But, if I play my cards right, the aftermath of said “bad crap” is going to change that. 😉

So stay tuned!

Complex Plotting: Zero = Four

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

For months—maybe even over a year—I have been frustrated with my first book, because I could not find a plot in it. With all the fiction I’ve read over the course of my life, and all the stories read to me before I could even read, and all those classes where teachers made me analyze and chart plot structures, how in the world could I create a book without a plot?! The possibility had never even occurred to me. And once I began to scrutinize the possibility, I was even more disheartened to find it true. Because what else could be the problem?

But after my sixth attempt to outline my plot points—always getting stuck in the same place—I tried a new approach, and finally realized my problem. It’s not that I don’t have a plot. It’s that I have four plots running concurrently, and the primary focus is the romantic one, so no traditional plotline gets the limelight enough to emerge as the official identifiable plot. In fact, you might argue that all four of these plotlines are actually story arcs—meaning they span at least part of the series, rather than being resolved in a single book.

So if you’re a “pantser,” and you’re having trouble unearthing that plot that seems like it’s hiding or nonexistent, I suggest writing out a play-by-play outline, and then an extremely vague outline of points, and see if you can divide things up by topic.

If you can’t abide pinning down your work like that, write down your ideas in different colored pens, and then take a look at what kinds of things ended up in each color. Surprise! You’ve drawn yourself a mind map, and now all you need to do is draw up the key. That’s what I did. Sometimes you just need to look at your thoughts differently to understand what’s going on and roll with it.

These are my plots, as I discovered them when I tried separating them out into categories (as defined by the parties involved):

  • Pandora
  • Temple
  • Noble
  • Romance

I suppose I could split “Romance” again, into “Gian & Labriella” and “Rome & Labriella“…but I would actually prefer to stick with a triangular effect. I want to use Gian to enhance and/or force out a definition of Rome and Labriella’s relationship, and use the nobles (and Pandora, and the temple) to further force it out of the shadows. That probably means I need to scatter Gian’s parts throughout the timeline a bit more, instead of having so many chapters between him and Labriella in the first book.

In my case, does the solution to having four plots entail untangling those plots? Or maybe picking just one per book? Ummm….Ew. I mean, I could do that, but I wove all those plots together subconsciously for a reason; they add depth to one another. At first glance it appears that there is no plot, because you’re walking through the characters’ lives. It’s those elements in their lives that brought them together, and that make up all those plots. Each is a festering issue that needs to be dealt with–and each starts out very small.

Part of the reason I’m so set on revising my first book again, is because I want to resolve either the noble plot or the temple plot (or both) by the end of the first book. I now suspect the noble plot will be more of an undercurrent that will come to a head on several supporting occasions. So I’m fixing my attention on the temple plot. If I start book one with the temple, then I should end book one with the temple. Otherwise, Labriella being considered a “runaway” becomes old news and eventually feels buried or ignored.

Previously the first book revolved around the question of whether Rome would allow Labriella to stay with him. But a few of my readers complained that they were running so many insecure circles around one another that it was slowing down and lengthening the story. And I agree. At least one set of circumstances needs to be sealed in by the end of the first book.

I feel like I’m trying to cram in a lot of things. But maybe, if I eliminate lengthy descriptions, consolidate scenes, and get rid of reflective dialogue, I might still be able to shorten things up. After all, my goal for revising this time around is to keep the plot moving.

Beasts, Alphas, Doms, and the BDSM Line

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

First, I’d like to thank my anonymous reviewer for their compliment, in saying that my story was well-written. But second, I would like to address some concerns that this reviewer brought up.

For those of you who haven’t read the review, the subject is the mentality behind alphas and dominants, and what that tendency actually says about the person in question. This begs the question of whether an alpha can ever be considered a well-rounded character. Since one of my two main characters is a beast character, and he is the focal point, this tension makes up the crux of my story.

“I have always found over-the-top ‘alphas’ or ‘doms’ to be more than a little repugnant…”

Alphas and dominants certainly cater to a particular taste. The stories that revolve around them often center around the issue of control. This is because being an alpha means being at the top of the food chain, and therefore usually at the top of a societal structure. Think “natural leader” who’s got the fate of his clan or community or business in his hands. (Note that when most fantasy or paranormal readers see the word “alpha,” they typically think “werewolf pack leader.”)

Control for an alpha is a double-edged sword. On the one edge, he has to keep control of his pack—settling squabbles, administering justice, appeasing offended parties, protecting against outside forces. He’s the politician and the ranking military commander at the same time. On the other edge, he has to keep control of himself; he’s the most powerful member of his community, and he’s accountable for how he handles that power. Theoretically, he has the ability to bring down the whole pack with him. Not to mention every life he is responsible for is on his conscience.

Now, let’s move on to beasts. If you’ve snooped around Beauty and the Beast stories and TV shows, you’ve probably noticed that there are two types of beast characters that writers present: the man who is beastly on the outside, and the man who is beastly on the inside. Often beastly characters end up ugly on the outside as a reflection of being ugly on the inside (i.e., by a curse or a spell). But there are exceptions where a kindly man is unfortunate enough to end up with a repulsive appearance by no fault of his own. The woman who can see through that guise is richly rewarded—either by the amazing character of the man underneath it all, or by a more material peeling back of the ugliness to grant the heroine a physical representation of the beautiful man she knew him to be all along.

Now let’s look at my alpha beast character specifically.

My reviewer is right: Rome is incomplete, and he is damaged. His parents were murdered when he was a child, leaving him orphaned, and he didn’t cope well. Then he got a beast persona shoved into his already-existing personality. And then his best friend and crush dumped him, and he doesn’t know the whole story of why. He’s been abandoned most of his life, he’s in a constant psychological battle for his sanity, and he doesn’t understand love.

What he does understand is that he has issues—the kind that make him unsafe for people to be around. He feels a very strong connection to Labriella, but he doesn’t know what to do about it. He doesn’t trust himself to do the right thing, but he can’t bring himself to stay away from her either.

Labriella, for her part, does not stick around for the pain and pleasure of the experience. She sticks around because she feels the deep connection too. She sticks around because she wants Rome himself—even if that is impossible for him to comprehend. And she’s willing to demonstrate that by putting up with a lot.

If you think Labriella is the type to just “roll over” once she’s comfortable, though, you’re greatly mistaken. Rome has a way of bringing out the adventurous side of her. You’ve only had snippets of it so far. Remember, she’s used to that spark inside her being extinguished by the temple. Once she learns that Rome’s baiting her (rather than just trying to push her buttons)…well, let’s just say things’ll get a little steamy. Just give the tables time to turn.

What kind of relationship does that make this? Is it BDSM?
Well, Rome’s an alpha beast, so we’ve already got the “D” for “Dominance.” I did consider putting some light bondage into the story—the handcuffed or tied-wrists kind, not much beyond that. I’m still undecided as to whether that’s a good idea, though, because that might give you the idea that Rome has to tie her down to make her stay. And while he may think that, it doesn’t make it true. As for SM…well, the only pain between the main characters in this story should be incidental. Hurting one another isn’t going to make them happy or satisfied. In fact, Rome is deathly afraid of hurting her. Only a few love-bites might be on purpose.

The idea is that letting one person in can change everything. (…Well, that’s one of the ideas, anyway.) So, you’re right: Aggressive posturing is not the way. But my intent is not to glorify Rome’s aggressive posturing. The intent is to introduce a new element to soften it, and bring balance to the equation. And that element is Labriella.

So I would ask you this about Rome: Is he immature because he is an alpha? Or is he an immature alpha?

Because I would say that an alpha is supposed to take care of others. He shows his maturity by fulfilling this responsibility. But living alone does not facilitate relating to people. An alpha without at least one person to depend on him…How can he possibly learn how to be a good leader? How to be a good husband? How to be a good friend?

As for the kinds of women who are attracted to this kind of male character…

I theorize that there are 4 common draws to fictional alpha characters:

  1. the quest for power
  2. the desire to not be responsible for once
  3. sympathy for the emotional plight
  4. curiosity

Quest for Power. I’m talking about that man or woman who always has to be in control, be the best there is, or come out on top. They don’t care who they have to step on to get there. In fact, stepping on certain people might make them feel more powerful. And that’s good, because it’s all about them. They want to be that alpha. They’re jealous of him, so they’re studying him. One day, they’ll have more; they’ll be better. Or one day, they’ll have someone like him, to love and control. He’s the top dog, so they’ll make him submit, to prove that they are the only one who can do it.

Desire Not to be Responsible. Some people just plain get tired of being in control. They have to make all the hard decisions all day, every day. They always have to look out for themself, because nobody else will. They have to take care of their entire family, and they want to know who’s going to take care of them. Or they realize that they’re reserved or reclusive or socially awkward, or will always say “maybe later” to the person they’re actually dying to be with. To these people, an alpha male looks like the perfect solution. Maybe they’d push back in real life. But in the safety of their own head? He brings out their repressed wild side. And maybe, just maybe, they can trust him.

Sympathy for the Emotional Plight. It’s not about control at all; it’s about the person on the other end of it. The alpha has the weight of the world on his shoulders, and he may or may not know how to handle it. Who’s going to help him? Who’s going to care for his heart, when everyone else just cares about what he is or isn’t doing for them? Who’s going to hold him when he comes home exhausted and broken at the end of a long day? Who’s going to be his sidekick when nobody wants to follow his lead, or when he doesn’t believe in himself, or when the problem’s too big for him to face alone? “I’LL DO IT!” scream ten million fangirls. Because it’s not just about where he has the power and the prowess and the bravado; it’s about where he doesn’t. (Otherwise, he would be a hatable character.)

Or maybe they look at the alpha male, and say, “Hey, that reminds me weirdly of me…or how accomplished I wish I was. Where’s my sidekick love-interest?”

Curiosity. These are the outsiders looking in. They’re not really sure what’s going on, or how they feel about it, but they’re interested to see a new-to-them concept play out. “To each his/her own” is their motto. They’re just wondering what some people’s “own” looks like. They want to see something new and exciting. They can’t wait to see what happens next, because it doesn’t play according to the usual rules of engagement. They want to dip their toe into the forbidden pool. Or they just want to slake their curiosity so they can stop wondering what all the fuss is about.

Feel free to chime in with another reason to add to my theory. Or if you’re thinking, ‘Heeeey, that’s not right!’, feel free to correct. What good is a theory, if it’s not perfected?

I will end by saying that I by no means think alpha males should appeal to everyone. I myself am rather on-the-fence about it. I don’t like a character to be too strong, but I don’t like them to be too weak either. For me, it comes down to what that character does with what is given to them—them learning how to use it, what they learn from having it, and watching them grow from it.

3 Seasons

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

3 Seasons Flow Chart

3 Seasons Flow Chart

Alright, I know this map is a little archaic, but I finally figured out what I’m doing with the seasons! It means a little backtracking to edit out some of the insinuations about winter, but I am totally willing to go there, because I can ascribe a different season per volume!

Volume 1 → Planting Season {spring equivalent}
Volume 2 → Mating Season {summer equivalent}
Volume 3 → Frozen Season {winter equivalent}

I know Fall is not on the list. Sorry autumn-lovers, but I’m throwing it out. It’s simply not a romantically productive season. Planting season has to do with birth and rebirth (of both plants and animals), Mating season has to do with heat (both sexual and sunshine), and Frozen season has to do with cold (which necessitates hibernation, staying inside, being under the covers, and sharing body heat). If I put harvest at the end of Planting season, making Planting season literally all about plants (from planting seeds to harvesting crops), and make Mating season the red-hot time when all greenery dies out, that eliminates the need for Fall.

Only three seasons–another little way to remind you that this is a fantasy, and a thematic way to distinguish between volumes. The season doesn’t matter so much to volume 1. But in volumes 2-3…well, you’ll see the difference–psychologically, leading to action.

So…that puts us in Mating Season for volume 2. I seriously hope you can guess from that what is going to transpire.

Which means volume 3 will have battle scenes in the bitter cold. Awesome. Death all around.

(And no, I’m not saying that last bit to be morbid. >_< )

Write What’s Not There

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

It’s been really encouraging to see people reading, following, and favoriting me as an author. As I’ve been hunting for stories online to read lately, I’ve been reminded of why I began writing my story in the first place. Sure, I was bored and didn’t have a book with me to read. But I also had devoured so many online stories that there were few left in my genre that appealed to me at the time. Exasperated, I realized that I had subconsciously developed an ideal male character in my mind’s eye, somewhere between a fantasy and a character I would want to read about…but he existed nowhere except in my mind.

And so I created him. And somehow, I ended up writing the kind of story that I wanted to read—the kind of story there are so few of. It’s a darker genre, traditional in its culture of men placed over women, but unconventional in its opportunities to flip things on their heads, and in its determination to get inside the characters’ heads.

And really, that’s what I wanted: An angsty fantasy story with graphic romance as both the problem and the solution. I wanted to see two strong main characters fight against themselves, each other, and the world to become one. I wanted to see the woman use her “lower” position in society to become valuable. I wanted to see the strong man have an identity crisis. I wanted to see a beautiful beast who remained beastly. I wanted to see up become down and down become sideways. I wanted to take the “known” (a well-known fairy tale in this case) and turn it into Wonderland (which is illogical/mind-boggling). If I saw one more Superwoman or girly-girl, I thought I would scream…or vomit. If I read one more “let’s get pregnant and have a family,” I was going to throw something. I don’t want to read about a kid; I want to read about the love bunnies. Everybody else can go take a hike. And why do I have to wait until next chapter for a POV change?! What if I want to know what they think now, when it’s most important and fresh in my mind?

And so Beauty and the Beast was born—renamed The BeastKing Chronicles now. A series, but really all one story. A story that could continue on and on for an eternity, because it follows an immortal. A story whose romance doesn’t end in a single volume to trade for another minor-character couple, or end in a family and a happily-ever-after. A story that’s full of trials, just like life—but extraordinary trials, such as you could never actually live. A story full of characters who would be phenomenal or terrible to meet in person—the kind that could make you lust or scream, murder or sex up.

Don’t you want to read that kind of story?

What kind of story do you want to read?
And why aren’t you writing it?

The Beloved Character

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

Budding writers are really getting into perspective shifts now. The ability to shift points of view makes writing in first person so much easier a feat, since otherwise it is so limiting. But I must admit, as a reader I tend not to be a fan of POV shifts—usually because I only really care for one particular character. In rare cases, I may care for more than one character, and then I find myself enjoying the current perspective but constantly looking forward to the next shift.

Oftentimes POVs are done by chapter, remaining in one perspective for the duration of a chapter, and then choosing whether or not to switch for the next chapter. But I had just about enough of that with J. R. R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings series. 30 pages of one character, and then I wait 100 pages for that character to turn up again? I couldn’t even concentrate on the next chapter because all I cared about was the previous character! Plus he was tracking so many characters, that by the time he came back around to one, I had already forgotten all about them, because I could only keep so many life stories in my head at one time (especially when getting distracted by scenery). Did anybody else have that problem?

The annoying thing about first person in general is that you can only view an event from one person’s perspective. Even with POV changes, most authors I’ve read rarely take the extra pages to recount the same event from a different character’s perspective. Perhaps they find it unnecessary, or overkill. And in some instances, given enough detail, I am sure they are correct. But in other instances, the reader really doesn’t know what a particular character is thinking. Sometimes that just adds to the suspense of the story. But sometimes, not knowing actually becomes a distraction while reading the story; for the next 10 pages you’re still trying to puzzle out one character’s reaction, and every word you read you hope is the secret decoder ring. So until you get that decoder ring, you miss everything that is said in the next several pages. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to flip ahead in a book to find a mini resolution, so I could go back and read the pages in between. (Though, thankfully, I don’t suffer that ailment with actual book endings, mostly because when you’re reading a series, book endings rarely make sense unless you’ve read the book all the way through.)

My story features two strong characters—two main characters. This is unusual. Usually there is only one main character (though they may have a lover or sidekick who is constantly at their side). In the event that there are two, one of the characters is typically “weaker” than the other—for instance, the scrawny geek who is smart enough to think himself out of any situation, or the warrior who calls upon his remarkable strength or strange powers to change the tide of the battle. But most fantasy novels feature a strong hero (who may or may not know they are strong) and a strong villain (who usually knows or figures out that they’re strong enough to oppose the way others want things to be).

However, Beauty and the Beast is by nature a story that defies convention in these respects. Even the title portrays each character as not any more significant than the other. Traditionally, Beauty is physically attractive, practical, self-sacrificial, and strives to see beyond appearances, while the Beast is lonely, defensive, stubborn, and has an appearance that is unacceptable to society. These attributes can take many different forms, and do not have to be dictated by any particular circumstances, which is what makes renditions of the Beauty and the Beast story so unique from one another. Beauty may be smart and well-read, but that doesn’t necessarily make the Beast less so—in fact, usually he has a library with more books than Beauty has ever seen. So Beauty and the Beast are not necessarily opposites. And even the Disney version shows them more than capable of arguing, making Belle quite the rebellious damsel in distress. If Belle wasn’t so stubborn, the Beast would probably have pushed her around all the time, and he might never have fallen for her.

It is very important to me that my Beauty and my Beast are STRONG characters. Strong characters aren’t always going to get along, and there is not always going to be a clear victor when they don’t. But strong characters make for an extremely passionate pairing. In other words, the couple can be counterproductive at times, but when their priorities align, they make a powerful team. The only way to take down such a team is to separate them.

Labriella may seem like a weak character because she gets blown around a lot. But the only reason she gets blown around a lot, is because she cares about Rome, who is not at all an easy person to have any sort of relationship with.

Rome, on the other hand, is extremely indecisive. He has no problem making definitive decisions and sticking to them, but he overthinks things when it comes to Labriella because he cares too much.

But do not make the mistake of thinking that either of these characters is weak. They are human—in soul at least. Good and bad, strong and weak, aren’t so clear-cut.

Flowcharts are Useful

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

Flow charts are really useful. No, really, they are. You don’t even have to draw all the little boxes (though I suppose you can, if you really like shapes; who knows, maybe drawing will stimulate the creative side of your brain!). Or maybe it’s technically called a “web” if you just have ideas and lines. But I don’t like the spider insinuations, so I’m going with “flow chart.”

“But WHY should I care about flow charts?” you’re probably asking. “What does this have to do with actual story progress?”

Everything. It has EVERYTHING to do with story progress.

See, sometimes I’ll just see things–almost like a vision. Whole scenarios will play out in my head, like I’m watching a real-life video. And when I write, I just write what I see. If I can’t describe it accurately enough, I draw a picture or create a diagram or make a list of possible alternate words to record the idea until I find the words to describe it.

But sometimes, a story can get bogged down by ideas. If you have too many ideas, and no clue how to organize them, you can hit just as much of a block as if you had no ideas. I might know exactly where I want to go, and what I want to happen before I get there, but how do I actually get there?

And that, my friends, is where Mr. Flow Chart comes in

Intro to Chapter 10

Posted by Seriah Black Sheep on

daggerWith two main maps of Rome’s mansion posted, and a third map underway, my mind is now moving from hidden doors and secret passageways to the puzzles, stereotypes, and inner workings of society. Much to my chagrin, I have been forced to map out a rough sketch of Labriella’s town, thereby adding to the growing number of maps rattling around in my head. Without at least a rough sketch of the town, it is almost impossible to determine where Rome should go next in his quest for information, or what types of people he will meet and the nature of the help he will receive.

Sexism scouts be warned: This story will have all kinds of stereotypes. It is not that I endorse stereotypes. On the contrary: I make stereotypes to break them. It is my personal understanding that, while people hate to be put in a category, because everyone wants to be thought “unique” and “original,” each person either enjoys or overlooks the advantages of having a stereotype forced onto them, to either their advantage or their downfall.

What do I mean?

I mean if you are considered a “jock,” many people may say you are good at sports and nothing else. The jock has the advantage, because people are expecting them to use brawn instead of brains. By using quick wit and intellect, the jock may overpower their unsuspecting opponent in a heartbeat, at the time of their choosing.

I mean if you are considered a “nerd,” many people may assume that your only redeeming quality is your above-average intelligence. The nerd has the advantage, because people expect them to rely on good grades and lengthy explanations full of big words to get them through life. But many nerds are deemed such because they care more for their mind than their appearance, and at the drop of a hat, if they really wanted to, they could show the outward beauty they’ve had all along and stun their opponents into shocked silence.

I mean that nobility, merchants, business owners, bartenders, common people, servants, prostitutes, doctors, and priests, heroes and villains, men and women, major and minor characters, are all expected to act a certain way, and while they may be trapped by the heavy weight of expectations others have put on them due to their station, they are also granted advantages due to their station, borne of the element of surprise and the opportunity for the unexpected.

There is the added bonus that most people label what they are afraid of. For instance, the average high schooler might be afraid of the jock’s physical strength or the nerd’s genius or the artist’s viewpoint. People are afraid of talents and abilities they believe they do not have, skills or experiences they believe will give others the upper hand and make them vulnerable. People persecute what they don’t understand, misinterpreting it as a threat.

Stereotypes are made to be broken. The story of a beauty and a beast is the epitome of that, no matter the writer or their chosen rendition. It is an inescapable contrast borne of other people’s labels induced upon that which they can and cannot understand.

And so I set about to make a society in order to break it, that it might be remade, and then broken again, and so on. Is our society not one which constantly changes? Are stereotypes and tendencies of Rome and Labriella’s world so different from the history (and in many ways, the present) world of our own? Just because we don’t like certain events in our history, doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. Just because we don’t like certain aspects of our society, doesn’t mean they don’t exist, or that we don’t have to deal with them–many times on a daily basis.