#but there's a difference between fiction writers writing that and an academic writing it

[dapurinthos]

parts of the rise and fall of the galactic empire were written for me i swear:

lolololol his biography is titled after his dying words from legends

also, this is getting added to my 'cavan scott 2k27 aotc-tie-in novel' foreshadowing moodboard:

i just realized that i do have dr kempshall's other book, which i'm going to load on my kobo to read immediately after this because the level of satisfaction i am getting out of reading a star wars history book written by an actual, professional historian is off the charts. the homework has been done holy shit.

just look at this revenge of the sith novelization reference:

from:

[governmentintelligence]

i'm going to throw out there too that there are different paragraph lengths for different situations. academic essays? usually have double line spacing. so a paragraph could easily take up half a page if it has like, 5 thick sentences. same with research papers or nonfiction books. sometimes there's a lot that fits in there and your line spacing is bigger and it makes sense to have a long paragraph.

you also often have a lot to get through in one paragraph in those kinds of works and you want to keep the same "idea" in one paragraph, so the reader knows everything you're saying about that "idea" is connected. if you're writing an essay on like, a book, and you want to make a point about one line in the book, then you might want to keep that all to one paragraph so the act of introducing the line, the analysis on the line, and the looping into your general essay topic are all in the same place.

yeah, long paragraphs are hard to read, but they have a purpose. same as long sentences. it's about using grammatical variety to maintain your readers attention.

Whole-heartedly BEGGING writers to unlearn everything schools taught you about how long a paragraph is. If theres a new subject, INCLUDING ACTIONS, theres a new paragraph. A paragraph can be a single word too btw stop making things unreadable

[whencyclopedia]

Notework: Victorian Literature and Nonlinear Style

This book is recommended to academics and university students interested in different approaches to fiction writing and the evaluation of literary works published in the late Victorian period and early 20th-century literary criticism. Simon Reader provides a novel approach to the creative writing process and analyses the periphery of fiction.

Victorian literature often presents the two matching pieces of the same artefact – expressed and implied. Naturally, any work of literature written in this period carries traces of the obscure and intertwined. In Notework, Simon Reader draws attention to this fragmented aspect in his investigation of notes, diaries and writings of Charles Darwin, George Gissing, Roland Barthes, Gerard Manley Hopkins, Oscar Wilde, and Vernon Lee. Having been motivated by Darwin’s concept of useless organs, Reader endeavours to understand the impact of these useless fragments on the published works by scrutinizing the disorganised aspect of writing and aims to reach beyond the limitations of form and genre in literature. This book is the most suitable for academics or university students interested in literary criticism or literary history.

Through problematising the literary approach of the New Criticism, Reader argues that close and minimalistic reading of any literary work perceives beauty only at the totality or within the bounds of the text, respectively, and disregards the value of the parts on their own. He illustrates how this approach would focus only on a narrow space of meaning. Instead of disregarding so-called useless texts, he employs them to peer through writers’ personal lives and writing processes. What Reader calls nonlinear style is the totality of personal expressions and textual interactions of these notes, diary entries and other affiliated fragments. However, not all fragments evolve into the parts of a whole or necessarily become related to the fictional product. In other words, they defy their own usefulness. Reader argues this moment as the point when we see fragmentary writing in its own elements. Ultimately, this book draws attention to the process of literary production and a deeper appreciation of a literary text.

In Part I, Reader analyses the nonlinear as a machinery of processing momentary ideas and aspirations. Darwin’s diary entries, for Reader, are instrumental in forming his ideas on evolution because they allow him to roam around natural forms and the environment without any specific aim or argument in need of evidence. This is also true for the novelist George Gissing, whose notes reveal a style of degree zero realism in writing that is free from the necessity of prescribed ends and motivations.

In Part II, the book investigates the nonlinear writing that accompanies the creation of literary work. For Hopkins, there exists an intangible relation between the animate and inanimate aspects of nature and through his notes and observations, the poet yearns to be a part of this vast collective being. Torn between his poetic aspirations and vocational commitments, Hopkins seems to have used the nonlinear style to achieve a congregation of fictional creators with the Christian god. In his study of Wilde’s notes, Reader sees a computer-like attitude for achieving a large flux of information and data.

Reader then steps into the domain of modernity and examines how nonlinear style can work outside the limitations of classical fiction writing. Part III uses the previous analysis of Darwin to examine Vernon Lee’s notes to show how Lee's nonlinear style is an expression of fluctuating aesthetic responses by relinquishing any pretence of genre and form in her career. True to the modernist statement on the possibility of presenting a coherent expression of life through subjective observations of the writer, Lee is in search of life scattered around through objects of triviality and recollection.

Reader, Associate Professor of English at College of Staten Island, the City University of New York, concludes his project in a Darwinian way by proposing the existence of fragmented writings of an author beyond and independently from the affiliated work of fiction. He also foresees the possibility of recovering the individual via contemporary documentation of social media interactions and the impressions recollected through that documentation.

Continue reading...

[fipindustries]

im currently reading "Eleven thesis (and antithesis) about fiction writing" by guillermo martinez, an argentinian writer whose main career was as a mathematician (studied in oxford and everything). he wrote "imperceptible crimes" which was adapted to the movie "oxford crimes" with elijah wood and john hurt.

so, a book about the rules of writing, not something i usually read except that is not true at all because a huge part of the conent that i consume in tumblr are giant effort posts about the writing process, writing analysis and such. so this is, in a sense, that except in physical book format.

its very interesting, the guy puts a lot of emphasis on being original, he spends a lot of time sort of debunking that idea that "everything has already been written" and how "there are only 4 themes in all of literature" and such other tibdits of common wisdom. his main point is not that a writer should strive to create something that never has been seen before, but rather that one should make an effort to avoid cliches, the common, well trodden, tired and beaten to the ground tricks. and that if one is to engage in those things they should find the way to add a new spin to it, to give it something new that refreshes it. not just in terms of themes or plot or tropes but in the very way one uses language. basically the same reason why we dont start books with "it was a dark and stormy night" and the reason we dont end them with "and they lived happily ever after".

besides that it is fascinatng to read the way this man structures and presents his "thesis" about writing because its really obvious this guy is a mathematician. at the begining of the book he establishes "meta-thesis", fundamental rules that will gobern the structure of all further rules. he is very quantitative at times in the way he measures this or that standard, he makes use of symbolic prop logic to bolster his arguments, but also he is insanely well read in the way he will bring up tons of very specific quotes from all across the literary canon as examples and counter examples of what he is saying.

but above all he is clear and concise. this is a fairly short book, 225 pages, and he doesnt beat around the bush with what he is saying, if anything he belabors his point, just to make sure you got it. he is not trying to be clever here, this is not an academic book, this was written for anyone to read.

as a last comment, i found cute the part where he has to clarify to the reader the difference between the theme of a story and the tropes in the story. because he assumes (correctly) that his readership didnt spend most of their formative years in tv tropes.

[leohtttbriar]

I think Michael like for all that she is she is definitely an anthropologist like I think she takes a very great cultural lense before a scientific

you know, i think you are absolutely right! thank you so much for bringing this up! i wasn't even thinking about her academic specialties when i wrote this post. her first question being about "praying" could very easily just have been the way she was trained to meet alien peoples where they are first before obnoxiously being like "what is that, tho"

and, to your point about the cultural v scientific lens:

for better or worse, i'd say star trek collapses the boundaries between a lot of academic disciplines. "hard" v "soft" science doesn't seem to be a distinction in the star trek speculative world, where linguistics and anthropology are as much about physics and biology and no one is going to pretend like learning languages is a different kind of Study to learning chemistry. this sometimes does not work, imo, because sometimes the writing will accidentally slip into an unexamined essentialism with the alien cultures, which renders the whole of the allegory sort of silly and potentially all kinds of offensive. but it sometimes does work.

discovery, from what i remember of the first two seasons (i'm only just now starting the third, bc i lost my cbs account between 2 and 3, alas! etc), seems more able than other series to collapse the distance between disciplines and walk the line between what is cultural and what is material culture informed by biology. like saru constantly talks of his alien species and how their history of being hunted on his planet manifests in a perpetual anxiety and tamed-curiosity for him but also lends a level of care and sensitivity that he excels in---all of which fleshes out the character while giving him the awareness and consciousness to know why he may be acting a certain way compared to others and why he shouldn't ever be demeaned for it and where his body and his body's millions-of-years-old natural history can be challenged with that consciousness and how his consciousness can be valued precisely for its origins.

the klingons and vulcans, while not as sophisticated as the character saru, also seem to be largely cultural products that are informed by their specific biology. michael, somewhat caught between the cultural product and her own biological reality, can affect vulcan mannerisms and is very often portayed as thinking like a vulcan, while remaining very recognizable to us. her phrasing and her pattern of speech, while not monotone, are normally utterances that move from established fact to logical conclusion. I have nowhere to go back to...the only thing I can do right now is trust something, she says, upon being thrust nine-hundred years in the future. it's the statement of a stoic philosopher (probably one of the "vulcan" influences). she is concerned with what is material and what is real and what is real to others.

which is why i really like what you pointed out about her anthropology expertise--culture is real and often naturalized to those who live in it. michael is definitely someone, what with her studies and how she was raised, who is intimately aware of how the alien can be made familiar, how bodies can't be denied but you can learn to know them, how consciousness is strange and existence-in-causal-time stranger, and how people (all creatures included) are never all one thing or another.

obviously there's no perfect speculative fiction creating speculative cultures. the hurdles of making a sell-able show and the ingrained biases and limitations of the writers are not insignificant. but the storytelling here is engaging with conceits concerning the preciousness of life and the immutability of that preciousness--even if you don't understand it.

(also i just love michael burnham with all my heart. don't think it was a coincidence she was named after the angel who carries a sword.)

[bettsfic]

In reference to your recent ask. I know some writers, me included bare really scared to ingest media in the genres we are currently writing in, for fear of accidentally sounding like the stories we just consumed. Is studying different genres before drafting actually important, like you said books that have been doing well in the last ten years for that specific genre?

first, i think it's flawed logic to avoid reading your genre because you're afraid of copying someone else. unless you straight up take their words, the worst that will happen is that someone will be better than you or have a similar idea as you and you'll feel bad about it. but you need to know what's out there in order to make informed decisions in your own work, in the same way you have to do research to develop a thesis in an academic paper. just because a novel is creative writing doesn't mean you can write in a vacuum. all creativity exists in response to existing work; your work can only ever get better by reading what else is out there, because there's more stuff you can respond to. and if you do take from someone else, by the time your manuscript gets into the hand of agents and editors, anything you might have borrowed will have been distorted into something new or completely edited out.

but that's broadly speaking. while actively drafting something new, writing's relationship with reading is a complicated one. i think it's important to read in your genre between projects (at least), and once you have a full draft, that's when you might want to begin more in depth market research, because that will help you create your pitch. market research isn't reading for funsies, it's developing a familiarity with the greater industry of publishing. that means you may only read the first 25% of a book and then the last ten pages, and move on to the next thing. reading for research is a completely different skill than reading for fun. you take what you need and you move on. your genre, whatever it is, is smaller than it seems, and the more you know about it, the more real it becomes to you. eventually you'll walk into a book store, go to your genre's section, and one out of every twenty books is going to be by an author you've met, worked with, or befriended.

you may be interested in more than one genre, or writing cross-genre, and that's fine. actually, that narrows your work significantly. the world of literary or upmarket science fiction, for example, is far smaller than literary fiction and science fiction separately. it's also a much newer market. if you're writing some kind of experimental, highbrow post-apocalypse novel, your predecessors are the road, station eleven, and a handful of others.

it may seem overwhelming, but the key is to read what interests you and let it inspire your work. ideally what interests you is also what you write, but i know that's not always a 1:1 scenario. then when you're ready to start sending your work out, that's when it's most important to buckle down and see what else is out there, so you're not sending an MS out into the world thinking you've created something wholly original when your basic concept hit the bestseller list last year and that author already sold film rights. you need to be able to acknowledge that other text in your query or pitch and explain how your story is different.

[celestemagnoliathewriter]

What is the function of AI art/writing? I've been asking myself that lately, while thinking of writer strikes, AI scraping of fanfic websites, and ChatGPT being used for school essays. What do its creators and users want out of it? Why, if it is human-curated (programmed), does it feel so inauthentic?

As a writer of both fiction (fanfic) and nonfiction (academia), the work that I produce is a reflection of the world around me, my experiences, and observations of others. The stories I write, and even persuasive academic works, try to grasp what is important to me or what I find is needed, even if it already exists in another form. We don't understand the entire human condition of sadness by reading one sad story - each story, each account, reveals a different dimension of it and invites us to reflect on it.

I'd argue that when we create, whether fiction, nonfiction, art, etc., we invite others to reflect with us, explore with us, and enter into a space we haven't seen before, if only because we cannot enter each others' minds and experience how we experience in each moment. It's an invitation to enter a part of the world that is, by necessity, new to us, even if we re-read, re-see, re-experience it repeatedly because we are ever-changing.

AI can't do this. AI can't invite us to experience, to laugh, cry, get angry, get sad, or explore a dimension of human experience. AI can learn by algorithm and programming, but it cannot and does not feel. It can only regurgitate an amalgam of human experience out of whatever it's given. It's not authentic because it's not human. AI can't experience the joy of brushing your fingers through a cat's fur, or the painful injustice of human suffering, or the absurdity of human follies. It can't experience for itself, so when it "creates" it isn't authentic or satisfying.

Perhaps one day AI will feel more authentic, but there's a fundamental disconnect, in my view, between what feels authentic and what is authentic. I don't even have to understand authenticity in order to recognize or affirm it (contemporary art falls into this category, for me). But AI won't ever be able to say, with the joy of a five year old, the pride of a twentysomething, or learnedness of anyone, at any age, "I made this. Look at it, read it, let me share a part of myself, my spirit, my life with you." AI has no life, no self-reflection, no human authenticity.

The function may be to assist human living, enrich us in some way, but it should only enrich us to the same level as tools might; they are in service to us. We are not in service to it, and we shouldn't try to replace authentic human experience with it, or else I fear we will lose some of the richness that can only be given through the sharing of one person's life with another.

[redroomroaving]

Writer Interview Tag

Ok, it took me 8 days to get here, but I’m finally responding to this lovely tag from @lemonsrosesandlavender I adored reading yours, it was so interesting!

I've tagged a few people in this post later on and would love any of them to join in and have a go at this if they'd like to share their own answers :).

Answers under the cut, because this got long - I touch on some personal stuff a bit here, so CW for chronic pain discussion.

When did you start writing?

I’ve been writing nonsense since I was a kid, largely - I have old notebooks from when I was very young I still keep full of little characters and story snippets I used to write mostly to entertain myself on long car journeys  - I had one particularly ridiculous sci-fi story written as a series of diary entries across 4 notebooks I started when I was like … I wanna say 10? Boy.

I attempted my first actual novel at about 16. Tried it again at 21. Tried it again at 26. I’m sat, still, on my first draft of something I actually could do something with that I started 10 years ago. Me and writing have had a bit of a journey, largely due to some workplace related trauma - but coming back to it after all this time has been a lot like coming home, really. I think I’ve always been, as my mother would put it; ‘away with the fairies’.

Are there different themes or genres you enjoy reading than what you write?

The honest answer is ‘probably not’. I rather enjoy non-fiction, but in terms of genres of fiction and themes within, I’d say I’m a very broad reader and outside of fic I’ve tried my hand at quite a lot of genres; I’ve dabbled in sci-fi and horror particularly, because that’s my happy zone.

Before joining the BG fandom my answer to this question would have been ‘Romance’, actually, because it was something I liked to read but didn’t necessarily feel brave enough to write; but truly, writing fic has pushed me right through my reticence to write romance of my own, and now it’s sort of all I write, I think!

Outside of that, I’m afraid I’m shamelessly drawn to the sorts of things I’d want to write.

Is there a writer you want to emulate or get compared to often?

I’ve not really been compared to anyone specifically; I’ve had a very flattering comparison of my themes in one particular story with Neil Gaiman - which is of course the kind of comparison anyone would be very happy to hear, but overall I’m not sure I’m prolific enough for that sort of thing ;).

I’m not sure who I’m trying to write like - if I’m trying to write like anyone - I like to think my prose style is reasonably my own but is almost inevitably really an amalgamation of all the people I’ve grown up reading and loving. 

Mostly, I’m a fan of the sort of magic realism/fantasy zone that doesn’t take itself too seriously, and a narrative voice that reflects that, and peppers it in around the characters own thoughts  - my bigger influences are probably in the Mervyn Peake, Warren Ellis, Pratchett, George Elliot, Peter S. Beagle sort of zone. 

To an extent, my interest in cinema and television is also a massive influence on how I write; I’ve spent most of my academic career working on breaking down scenes, the construction of frames - the threading of narratives on screen - and I don’t like to discount my favourite filmmakers and screenwriters as part of what I’m trying to achieve, too. 

Nothing should be in a scene without purpose - even if its superfluous presence is the purpose - and I keep that locked right to my heart. 

Can you tell me a bit about your writing space?

I don’t have a dedicated space particularly - my phone at 3am, by the coffee machine between meetings, the dining room table at times, my desk at other times - scribbled in the back of a notebook on the bus.

I’m a deeply disorganised person, and my creative process is much like my life; full of piles of laundry done in fits of productivity, half stacked and waiting to be put in their proper places; invariably, waiting forever.

What's your most effective way to muster up a muse?

I have no good answer for this either - writing, for me, is rather like possession. When it has seized me I’ll readily throw down thousands of words in a flurry, and when it’s gone, it is gone. There’s little in between.

If I can’t find it - it’s usually time to steep myself, and let things sit and soak into the bones for a while. Throw on a bit of music and let it turn around in my head without trying to force it out - a tactic that for me, at least, never works - imagine some scenarios or conversations, until something or other takes root. 

Half the time it’s just about sitting in my character’s heads for a bit until I feel like I really know them, and could respond as them to questions and queries readily - this is something I’ve carried over from being a long time Dungeon Master - whose prep for sessions was about 15% maps and monster stats and 85% ‘stewing in my NPCs until there’s no question the players can ask I can’t answer in character’. 

There’s nothing quite like the mania and rush of when the muse takes control, and it’s always a bit of a sorry experience when you find yourself on the other side of it, wondering once again where it went. 

Are there any recurring themes in your writing? Do they surprise you?

A few big ones - two that don’t surprise me, and one that does.

The first – coming to terms with what you were supposed to be, and what you are - the trajectory of my life hasn’t been particularly straightforward - I made a lot of decisions based on what I felt I owed to other people in my youth, my obligations to others, particularly family, steered my path towards disaster and the breakdown of my health, career, and life. I started over and found a new path. It’s not been easy. 

Over and over again I’m drawn to characters that have trajectories like this; who are coming to terms with what they thought they were supposed to be, the role they were supposed to have, and how they failed to meet those expectations - or in the case of some - how those expectations failed them. 

The second - pain, and finding the purpose within it. I have chronic pain of an unhelpful sort, acquired during the stuff I just mentioned - that can truly only be described as purposeless. In fact, I’ve had a clinician quite literally describe it as such (although the word they used was ‘pointless and unhelpful’).

I won’t pretend that’s been easy to live with, or that when I say ‘it is what it is’ whilst my body screams at me literally all seconds of all days and won't ever stop doing so forever, I’m just saying that because I can’t say anything else.

It’s not particularly surprising I ended up exploring this theme, inevitably. It’s probably why ‘Sufferer, I shall’, my Donnick x Abdirak fic, and that pairing that was so unexpected and clotheslined me out of nowhere, is the one that matters most to me. 

Finally, the theme that surprised me - is finding purpose and growth in love; for me, the heart of all the romances I write, big or small, is based on this foundation. If there’s no trajectory for individual growth, enhanced and augmented by a relationship with another - usually through the ways in which we can connect and more importantly gently contrast to push one another forward - I am not interested in the romance.

I’m painfully, painfully demisexual, so my romances need to be so dripping with Feelings it’s embarrassing. I didn’t know this about myself until I started writing it, but now I see it everywhere, and all of these three come together into a rather depressing sort of whole. I’ll sum up.

I’m constantly trying to build a happier tale than my own.

That one got sad, but it’s also the answer to this next question. 

What is your reason for writing?

See above. Writing gives me joy, but it also helps me to create a kinder, warmer world than the one I live in - even when I’m exploring its darker parts. 

Is there any specific comment or type of comment you find particularly motivating?

I love any comments, I truly do - they all fill me with joy - just to know someone has read something I’ve written.

I’d like to take a moment, though, to shout out to a few people in particular - because I think commenting is an art in and of itself, and instead of talking about what motivates me, I’d like to thank some people for motivating me.

When @benicemurphy found my Rolan x Geraldus fic ‘the Harper in the Tower’ I started getting some of the most insightful, most moving comments I’d ever received. The way in which you so perceptively saw every tiny hint, every theme and thread just absolutely floored me. Anyone who gets a comment from you should be honoured to do so.

This goes too for @cedar-phoenix, who I don’t think I have on tumblr (Cedar! found you!) - but who might be one of the most perceptive people I’ve ever had the pleasure of meeting. You have an absolute gift.

@graysparrowao3 left me some of the most punch in the face comments I’ve ever had on ‘Sufferer, I shall’. Watching your trajectory of reading the story and being greeted with ‘WHAT THE ACTUAL HELL’ truly, truly made my year. 

I love it when a commenter pulls out specific lines or moments that they enjoyed - especially because it’s never the ones I expect! @tavyliasin and @n1ghtmeri left me some of the most emotional comments on ‘Sufferer’ I’ve ever had the pleasure of receiving, and @darkurgetrash picking out specific lines of my Klaus x Kar’niss fic always gets me chomping at the bit to write more. It takes time and effort to leave the sorts of comments you do, and I want you all to know how deeply I appreciate it.

And of course, my dear @lizziemajestic - the only commenter who has left me a sobbing voice note. You have no idea how much that meant, and how much it has continued to mean, to me. 

How do you want to be thought about by your readers?

Honestly - I’m not really sure how to answer this. I hope it’s a warm cup of coffee; a bit of nourishment. I hope they can see how deeply I feel what I write, and that some of that comes through in the words they read - too.

I really care about all these silly little guys - and if reading it makes them smile, or cry, or really anything at all, that’s what I wanted, I think.

What do you feel is your greatest strength as a writer?

I’m terrible at talking about my own strengths so expect this to be a rubbish answer.

I like to think I’m good at character voices; I spend a lot of time thinking about and puzzling out how a character would speak and think - and as I predominantly, if not exclusively, write canon characters and NPCs, I hope I am able to capture their voices in a way that feels natural and organic. 

I never force a character to do anything - it doesn’t work, for starters - but I really do try to let them guide what’s happening and follow them where they lead. I hope that comes across in what I write and helps create something that feels in character and plausible, no matter what’s happening; I struggle at times with worrying this might mean things seem boring, or fail to meet expectations people might have of how things are going to go - but it’s a principle I stick to. If I’m changing something fundamentally about a character it feels wrong - and that’s a guiding principle I hold.

This extends to romances and relationships; I hope, at least, I build connections between characters that feel organic and earned, even when sometimes they are characters who literally have never interacted at all before. Finding the organic spark of connection is what I most enjoy writing. 

I hope I’m pretty good at environmental storytelling, too. It’s important to show character in the same way we show ourselves - in our environments, our habits and the spaces we occupy. Everything you do, the things you surround yourself with; that’s just as much you as the you in your skull. 

When you write, are you influenced by what others might enjoy reading, or do you write purely for yourself, or a mix of both?

“Why write if not to fill the world with the kinds of things I want to read?”

I try to write mostly for myself. I’ve written a few things based on prompts and ideas for others, and do enjoy that - but first and foremost, I’m writing for my own sake.

How do you feel about your own writing?

Mostly good. Mostly. I’m not the best, nor do I want to be - I try not to engage too much with thinking about the wider space and how I’m comparing to others - I know I’m plundering down in some obscure mines at times, and that’s ok - that’s where I chose to be.

I’m not good at complimenting myself, but, I have managed to write some things I’m genuinely proud of as part of finding my way back to writing full stop. 

Overall though, I think I’m just happy to -be- writing. After so long being unable to do so because of the pain and being unable to use my arms, and feeling like writing was the thing that ruined me, finding a way back to some creative joy and reclaiming my pain as purposeful has been, genuinely, a lifeline.

I apologise that this got all deep and sad. I hope if you’ve read this, you know how grateful I am to you all; I’ve been so lucky to find this space, and all of you, and myself again too.

[mediaevalmusereads]

Powers of Darkness: the Lost Version of Dracula. By Bram Stoker and Valdimar Ásmundsson (trans. Hans Corneel de Roos). Overlook Duckworth, 2016.

Rating: 4/5 stars

Genre: horror, 19th/20th century literature

Series: N/A

Summary: Powers of Darkness is an incredible literary discovery: In 1900, Icelandic publisher and writer Valdimar Ásmundsson set out to translate Bram Stoker’s world-famous 1897 novel Dracula. Called Makt Myrkranna (literally, “Powers of Darkness”), this Icelandic edition included an original preface written by Stoker himself. Makt Myrkranna was published in Iceland in 1901 but remained undiscovered outside of the country until 1986, when Dracula scholarship was astonished by the discovery of Stoker’s preface to the book. However, no one looked beyond the preface and deeper into Ásmundsson’s story.

In 2014, literary researcher Hans de Roos dove into the full text of Makt Myrkranna, only to discover that Ásmundsson hadn’t merely translated Dracula but had penned an entirely new version of the story, with all new characters and a totally re-worked plot. The resulting narrative is one that is shorter, punchier, more erotic, and perhaps even more suspenseful than Stoker’s Dracula. Incredibly, Makt Myrkranna has never been translated or even read outside of Iceland until now.

Powers of Darkness presents the first ever translation into English of Stoker and Ásmundsson’s Makt Myrkranna. With marginal annotations by de Roos providing readers with fascinating historical, cultural, and literary context; a foreword by Dacre Stoker, Bram Stoker’s great-grandnephew and bestselling author; and an afterword by Dracula scholar John Edgar Browning, Powers of Darkness will amaze and entertain legions of fans of Gothic literature, horror, and vampire fiction.

***Full review below.***

Content Warnings: blood, racism

Because this book is a late 19th/early 20th century work of literature, I'm going to structure my review a little different from normal.

I first became aware that there was an "Icelandic version" of Dracula a few years ago. Hearing that it contained a different plot, different characters, and various allusions to Norse-Icelandic folklore, I was excited to read it and compare it to Stoker's novel. And boy, did this story take me on a wild ride.

I won't spoil the plot for anyone who wishes to discover how different (or similar) it is to Dracula, so instead, I'll focus on the edition by de Roos.

Overall, I found this edition to be fairly accessible for a casual reader yet it involved enough supplementary materials to satisfy someone with a more academic interest in the work. de Roos's introduction clearly laid out the relationship between Dracula and Powers of Darkness, and I found the diagrams of the castle to be very helpful. As for the text itself, I don't read a lot of Icelandic, so I can't speak to the quality of the translation, but I appreciated the notes in which de Roos explains his choices.

I also really loved the page layouts in this volume. I love a book with big, beautiful margins that leave enough space for me to make my own annotations, and I appreciated that the "footnotes" weren't at the bottom of the page, but just to the right or left to the text so I didn't have to move my eyes very far. Granted, this layout did mean that there was a lot of wasted space, so this edition will probably best serve those who will be writing directly on the page.

Overall, I award this book 4 stars because it was a wacky reading experience, made all the more engaging by de Roos's introduction and informational annotations. The only thing preventing me from giving it a full 5 stars is my subjective enjoyment of the text itself; I found part 2 to be rather awkward, and the descriptions of the "ape-like" people reeked of 19th century racism (though de Roos points this out). Still, if you're interested in Dracula and its legacy, you'd do well to pick up this book, though if you're doing serious scholarship, you should probably find an Icelandic language version too.

[luxnebula]

My master's thesis was accepted today! It's available at OuluREPO now.

My research questions were 1. How do fiction writers use the library? 2. What kind of services do fiction writers want from libraries?

Previous studies that have researched writers and libraries have found that writers rarely use libraries as an information source or an information channel, but the fiction writers who are inclined to using the library, use it often. However, writers still value libraries and librarians despite lack of use. Writers prefer fast and easy information sources, and libraries are not thought to be fast and easy. Previous studies have also indicated that writers would like more material available online and more guidance on finding material.

I conducted my study as a survey, that I sent to a few forums for writers: r/fantasywriters, r/scifiwriting, r/worldbuilding, r/creativewriting and on the forums of SCP Wiki and its sister site's, Wanderer's Library's, Discord server.

The most popular library services according to my study are checking out books, using the library's website and using the library as a writing place. One of the main things that my study proved is that fiction writers do use the library, but not for information seeking.

I presented the question about wishes for library services as an open question in my survey, so the answers were qualitative. While analysing the responses, I found 12 categories: accessibility; basic library amenities; library premises; academic and scientific material; events and clubs; education and classes; writing and publishing; technology, digital and online; information services; "I'm already satisfied with library services"; "I don't use libraries" and other.

Accessibility focused on having a library nearby in the first place. Basic library amenities includes everything to do with books, libraries' collections, loaning and so on. This category also included for easier, faster and cheaper inter-library loans and better categorisation for books and book lists.

Library premises mostly hoped for designated areas, spaces and rooms to write, read or listen to audiobooks in. A lot of respondents emphasised silence and privacy.

Academic and scientific material included wanting access to academic libraries, article databases and journal articles about different subjects. Cooperation and the possibility for inter-library loans between academic and public libraries was also brought up, which could be a very interesting and important possibility for libraries themselves and patrons who also aren't fiction writers.

Events and clubs were about social gatherings for writers, which was the biggest category. Most comments simply wished for a group where writers could gather to write together and give critique to one another. Book clubs, author meet-and-greets, panels and guest lectures were also mentioned.

Education and classes of course included classes about writing, but other subjects too. Classes about self-publishing, social media, photoshop and so on was also brought up.

Writing and publishing was mostly about wanting resources for writing careers and getting one's writing published. This category was mostly divided between resources to hone one's writing skills and resources for publishing and becoming a professional fiction writer.

Technology and online category was mostly about wanting more digitised material, easier access to digitised material and more online services, like databases.

Information services were divided into two kinds of comments: concerning seeking information and concerning information sources. In this category there were many comments that wished for services that libraries already have, hinting that people are simply not aware of what services libraries have. This could be something that libraries want to work on.

"Other" category included everything that I couldn't fit into the previous categories. Some wished for cafés or coffee dispensers at the library. One comment wished that libraries could pay royalties to authors whenever their books were checked out. One comment wished for a "person who is expert in Photoshop and could help with book covers".

The demographic that my survey reached is mostly young and writes as a hobby, but wants to be a professional some day. This means that professional writers and older writers are absent from the study, so my study isn't representative of all fiction writers. However, I think it's important that my study represents this demographic that it does, because young, beginner and amateur writers don't have the same resources and skills as more experienced writers have. It's important to listen to their voices and give them resources they need so they can advance their careers. After all, they might have their future work included in the library's collection as well!

One of the biggest questions for future research that I personally found is the awareness and visibility of library services. As many respondents wished for library services that already exist, it hints that there is lots libraries could do to market their services.

Because my survey didn't reach many older adult, published or self-published writers, future research could fix this gap by asking these same questions from these demographics as well.

[saviourkingslut]

Hi! I saw that you mentionned scrivener in your latest post and I've been meaning to try it. Is it good? I'm a one-doc-per-chapter kind of person so I wonder if it would work for me.

hi, sorry for the somewhat late reply, i wanted to include some screenshots to make my explanation a little clearer but didn't have the energy to sit down for it properly before now. if you're a one-doc-per-chapter writer i definitely think you should consider it! scrivener's most important feature, i think, is that it gives you:

the opportunity to split up your writing any way you want, whether per chapter, per scene, or even per paragraph...

...but all your writing is always within immediate reach, and you can restructure it whichever way you want.

to make that a little clearer, i've included a picture from my own work. scrivener is mostly geared towards creative writing, but i use it for my dissertation and that works very well too. this is the general interface, where you can see i've been writing an introduction:

scrivener's most important feature, to me, is its 'binder', which is this bit:

at the top, you'll see 'draft' - this is the entirety of the project you're working on. in this case, that's my dissertation. underneath, you see a little book, called 'introduction' - that's a main part of the draft. and underneath that, you can see a couple of folders and documents. that's all the different parts of my introduction. you can create as many folders and put as many different documents in those folders as you want. what i find incredible about this, is that i have an overview of all my topics, and that i can switch between all my different topics without having to open different documents OR put all my shit in one big document, which always makes me lose my way completely. and if i feel like restructuring my text? well, i can go to the binder, and drag the texts to another spot there.

since you like to work by chapter, you could just structure your binder like that in a way that works for you, but you'd still have access to all your other work if there's ever a moment when you need to refer back to it. or if you're working on multiple chapters at the same time, you can just switch between them.

something else that has helped me a lot is the 'research' part of the binder:

the 'research' part is meant for you as a writer to put down all your resources - your pdfs, your images, whatever you're using as reference while you're writing. now, because im writing an academic text and need more references than the average (fan)fiction writer, im using zotero as a reference manager. instead, im using the reserach folder to store my writing plans so i can reference and update them there. you see that 'reorganisation' folder there: it's also where i store my texts when i notice that the current structure is not working at all and i need to start over - but in such cases i don't need to write all the text itself from scratch again. this way i can keep everything within easy reach and copy-paste in the same document (you can split your screen within the program, and work in two documents at once).

what's also great are the tools. in programs like word or google docs you'll find some of these, but not all. as you can see, the first symbol leads to a sidebar where you can put a synopsis for the specific text you're working on, and it lets you add notes. the second one lets you add bookmarks to your text, like texts or references you want within reach immediately. the third one lets you add specific metadata or tags. the fourth lets you make snapshots; scrivener saves all your work immediately, but if you're about to make a big change, you can create a snapshot and roll back to that if it's not working out after all. finally, there's the comments, which speak for itself. all the way down the bar you'll also see that you can label texts ('no label' here, there's a colour system) and note what part of the writing progress this part of the text is at.

what i personally like very much is the bar at the top that now says 'opening 2.0'. you can see a light blue bar at the bottom of it: that indicates my writing progress. you can set a writing goal in number of words for your project. for my entire 'introduction', that's 8000 words, and as you can see im nearly there. if you hover over the 'opening 2.0' bar, it'll shift to show you the number of words you've written AND the number of words you've written in that specific writing session like so: 7300/8000 | 345. what i like is that it counts the actual words written - if i've deleted a sentence, my count goes down again. that's useful for me because i tend to think 'oh i've written so much today' while all i've been doing is tiny edits for 2 hours, but not actually put down more words.

there's MUCH more that scrivener offers, but i can't explain it all here. they offer a free trial for 30 days, and it comes with a practice document that explains all the features to you by making you work in the program. id recommend giving that a try if you're interested! the program is expensive (it cost me 70 euros) but it's absolutely been worth it for me. i used to have long-ass documents with half-finished paragraphs and snippets of thoughts and sentences all over, and this has helped me structure my texts more easily while also not cluttering my workspace with loose thoughts and ideas because i have more places to put them now.

[tarysande]

Can I ask, how does one go about becoming an editor? Like, where do you apply for jobs?? What kinda training do you do?? Are there companies that hire out editors to writers? Im just so confused about it. Ive always been interested in editing, and am considering doing it as a job

Editing is a weird career.

Really, I started as a writer. Like, when I was eleven. In jr. high and high school, I was in a writing critique group and I wrote a lot. I graduated from university with a degree in theatre, film, and creative writing. I was often the person my friends came to when they needed help with a paper (or the correct placement of a semicolon). I've been involved in fandom since I was about 17, and I was very fortunate to fall in with a group of excellent writers who were also excellent betas and editors. I learned a TON from them without realizing how much I was learning.

I started editing by accident, really. Sometimes, that's how it happens. I mostly got gigs here and there through friends or word of mouth. About ten years ago, I got more serious about it. I worked for companies that paid horribly. Then I did an editing test for a company that paid less horribly, and they hired me. After a couple of years editing countless academic papers, ESL academic papers, novels, emails, business documents, etc., I decided to branch out on my own (mostly so I could work on more fiction; I was burned out on academic papers).

I joined Editors Canada, started volunteering with them, got a lot more experience, and took a few continuing ed courses to gauge where my skills were at and to determine if I needed to upgrade my education. I decided I didn't need to do that, because I already knew the things I was being taught.

I read a lot of books on editing, writing, and craft. I familiarized myself with the Chicago Manual of Style, APA, MLA, and a couple of other style guides. I learned the differences in spelling, punctuation, and style between US, UK, and Canadian English. I went to webinars, conferences, and courses (all the major editing associations offer these, usually cheaper or free for members; they are a great way to determine what kinds of editing you actually LIKE). I learned the difference between rules and preferences, and when to apply them to a text.

I work freelance, which means I have my own business as a sole proprietor. I'm a contractor with a couple of companies who sometimes send work my way, but most of my clients are individual writers planning to either self-publish or polish their work before seeking traditional publication via the agent/tradpub route.

Freelancing has many perks but is not particularly secure. Especially if you're American and need an employer to provide health insurance, or if you're single and don't have another income to lean on when contracts are scarce. These days, most of my work comes via referrals, my website, or the listing I have in the Editors Canada directory. I follow a couple of editing-related Facebook groups; I've learned a lot there, and I've also picked up the occasional client. A couple of people have found me through LinkedIn. A couple of people have found me through here!

I've never worked in-house for a publisher--mostly because having control over how many hours I work and when I work them is my top priority. In-house is a whole different ballgame; I know a bit about it from my peers, but I don't have firsthand experience to pass on. These jobs are supposedly more secure--and they tend to be salaried, with benefits, etc.

"Editing" is a GIANT umbrella term. There are SO many types of editing out there. People tend to think of book publishing first, but that's only one avenue. There are also different kinds of editors who tackle different types of problems. I've done enough of everything to recognize that I am much happier when I'm working on big picture stuff--coaching, developmental editing, manuscript critique. Others specialize in the nitty gritty mechanical details that make proofreading or copy editing a better fit.

Right now, the bulk of my work life is actually spent ghostwriting. The client's business-materials editor posted that his client was looking for someone to help with characterization in a novel. I ended up winning that contract. He came to me with one monster book. I helped him realize it needed to be at least a trilogy, and now he has plans for a ten-book series--and I'm helping write it. But I got the job because of the work I've done on the development side of editing--and because I've spent SO MUCH TIME learning about characterization (via acting, fandom/writing fanfic, reading, etc.). So. It all feeds into the same place.

The tl;dr is that my experience has been a bizarre mix of being in the right place at the right time, ongoing professional development, and learning the value of volunteering with an association. If I were starting down this career path right now, I'd probably do an editing certificate (there are many out there, depending on country). I'd definitely join an association sooner (even as a student member) and volunteer.

Actually, the ultimate tl;dr is ... this industry IS CONFUSING. So, don't feel bad about being confused. It's actually probably about eight different kinds of job wearing a trench-coat and pretending it's something called "Editing."

[nothingenoughao3]

Victor Frankenstein-Reanimator

Since whether or not a thing is a fanwork, or fannish, or fanfic has been doing the rounds lately, I thought I'd contribute my take.

This started because @andalusiapunk and I were debating the merits and demerits (mostly demerits) of classifying "Frankenstein" as fanfic. This led us to consulting different academic definitions of fanworks. I was technically the devil's advocate, but not because I believed "Frankenstein" was a fanfic--it had to do with a related point, which I'll make by asking another question.

Why isn't Lovecraft's "Herbert West-Reanimator" fanfiction?

"Reanimator" was openly labeled by Lovecraft as an homage/pastiche/parody of "Frankenstein"... terms now often used to describe fanfic. He wove references to literary works Shelley quoted/relied on... a tactic also used by fic writers to ground their works in the original canon. The cultural impact of "West" primarily lies in "Frankenstein" adaptations, for 'Victor as a total madman with a slavishly-devoted assistant who hates and fears him for reasons unclear in the text' is not even slightly justified in the original work... but that is the plot of "Reanimator". Similar to how Kirk Drift will occur in fandoms where headcanons displace the original characterizations.

So what gives? What makes "Reanimator" an original work? It can't just be "capitalism", my original answer, because "Frankenstein" was very much licensed back in its day.

The difference, I feel, is that writers used to have a sense of ownership over their words, but not their ideas.

Lovecraft didn't own the Cthulhu Mythos, and he didn't originate a lot of its ideas. Most of what we refer to as the "King in Yellow" aspects of the Mythos actually originated with Robert W. Chalmers... who also borrowed and reworked terms, such as the name Carcosa, from other writers of weird fiction. Much of what we think of as codified and settled canon in the Cthulhu Mythos also came from August Derleth's works.

IOW these weird fiction writers considered publication to be something they could profit off of, but also the moment where their own ideas became available to inspire others. It does not seem to have occurred to any of them to sue, or threaten to sue, someone else who worked the Necronomicon into their story--for that was the point, tricking readers into thinking the book was real because so many disparate authors claimed it existed. (Which, for God's sake, actually worked.)

This relates to some of the action we saw on the Holmes front in the past few years. For decades, the Doyle estate claimed (incorrectly and illegally, IMO) that they controlled the ideas behind the later parts of the Canon, and not just the words. Accordingly, you could write original fiction featuring Holmes, Watson, et al., so long as you didn't refer to or rely on those later works without permission. If you wrote something for that part of the Canon, it was fanfiction.

Recently, their hold expired. Now you can publish original works referencing the latter part of the Canon. (I'm going to get around to publishing mine, which is, funnily enough, a Sherlock Holmes vs. The King In Yellow tale.) But there was nothing meaningfully different between one year and the next--solely the perception that, legally, the estate could no longer force people to label their works as fanfiction.

The strict definition of "fanfiction" involves writing based on works that are licensed to another entity--meaning, somebody else has the publishing rights. But again, Shelley had the publishing rights to "Frankenstein", and Lovecraft had the publishing rights to "The Festival"... but it never seemed to occur to either them or the holders of their literary estates to demand that publishers quash anybody writing pastiches, parodies, or works referencing corpse-construction or the Book of the Dead.

Whether or not fanfiction is forbidden by license holders is immaterial to whether or not fanfiction exists. We see Gaiman approving of fanfic all the time, which (not to accuse him of anything untoward, because it's fine for him to do this) does have the convenient effect of nobody trying to profit off tales of Aziraphale and Crowley. Notoriously, Anne Rice used to send cease-and-desist letters to fanwriters, -artists, and archivists who produced works related to the Vampire series. This did not stop fannish works from being created. But it did create a category of "fanfiction", which could be defined as "anything related to the Vampire series which was not produced by or approved of by Anne Rice". Conveniently, Gaiman has the same definition of fanfiction for "Good Omens": anything not written by or considered canon by Gaiman is fanfic.

"Reanimator" is not fanfic because the license holders of Shelley's works didn't think of it as fannish. Because, in part, the category of "fanfiction"--despite attempts at legitimizing fics by retconning various stories as such--was an invention of, primarily, Paramount to differentiate between "legitimate" Star Trek-related writing and the "illegitimate". Which stories they were willing to take a cut of and which stories were banished to the shadow realm of zines.

What makes a work fanfic, then, is whether or not the license holders consider it to be fanfic.

Which, when you think of it, is a sobering thought.

[mareenavee]

Been meaning to pick your professional brain a bit, so... Tell us about rewriting/drafting/editorial pass! What happens when you read to edit? How is it different when you read someone else's work vs your own? What do you look for, what do you notice differently from when you're in writing mode? Any advice to get better at the whole editing thing, and what typical advice that we often see (kill your darlings, never do x, always do x, write for yourself, know your audience...) do you think could use some nuance or explanation? And maybe most importantly, what advice would you give a starting beta reader? What makes for a good beta reader and/or editor, especially when there's no monetary transaction involved and it's all donated labor? What are some of the essential skills?

Hello my friend!! Thank you so, so much for asking me about editing!! I am over the moon. I love this part.

I'm lucky because while it's been my job for quite a long while now (often among other responsibilities) work hasn't ground out the joy of it. I prefer to edit fiction, of course, over corporate copy and advertising, but am honestly happy to dig into either kind of project. The point of it is to bring the right words to the forefront of whatever the written material is, I think. To make the piece the best it can be, and at the same time show the writers how capable they really are. (: So let me dive right in! (THIS IS LONG, by the way, so under the cut! The irony is not lost on me about wordiness and editing and then producing this LOL but it's alright. I'm a chatty person online and this is more or less conversational.)

What is an editorial pass?

There's several kinds of editing. What I do most for paid corporate work is proofreading -- which is catching typos and grammar mistakes and correcting them. This is usually a first pass of any given project. This pass doesn't usually suggest changes -- things are left as is except typos and grammar mistakes. This is sometimes also called copyediting, though copyediting is the next step up and also checks for style consistency, among a few other things, especially in academic and corporate work.

Next is line editing -- this is more checking for word choice at the sentence level. We're looking to make sure things flow together nicely, and that we're cutting the fluff out when necessary. When things get too wordy and there are cleaner ways to phrase something, a line edit pass will catch these things.

Next past that is content editing -- this is done on a full manuscript or story to check that the ideas are complete and the story flows together logically. This should be paragraph and chapter level and should also check for consistency in tone and authorial voice.

After that is my personal favorite, which is structural editing. This is actually technically what you should start with if your manuscript is already complete. But we'll get into the difference between having work beta read and having work edited below. Anyway structural editing is going to check for, well, structure -- organization, flow and quality of the book in its entirety.

There will be notes regarding concerns and big picture issues with the story. These usually won't include detail-level edits, though some professional editors do offer multiple passes on the same manuscript. If your structural edit is mostly glowing praise with few key concerns or suggestions, you can move onto more detail oriented edits to address those specific concerns.

And an even higher level editing that can happen even before a manuscript is complete is Developmental Editing. I like to think of this as an outline critique or consultation more so, as this pass won't be rewriting or doing any sort of detail work. The editor takes your idea and helps ask the right questions to make sure you're organizing your ideas to the best of your ability. They help an author to see the book as a reader would see it.

What happens when you read to edit?

Reading for enjoyment is actually as important to editing as it is for writing. The key takeaway is that an for either, you need to have a extremely solid grasp on the components that make a good story. For an editor, especially so when the 'rules' might be broken purposefully by an author. Honestly, a lot of it is still opinion based. Two different editors, generally, will have different insights for you reading the same manuscript, biased by how much they read and what their specialties are. Most editors, too, will have an ear for grammar which nobody wants to talk about but it's true. You don't need to memorize every single tiny little grammatical detail to explain in full to your authors when you edit and catch errors. But an editor usually can hear when things are off more or less and can provide resources if a mistake is noticed as a consistent issue.

Mostly when you're reading to edit and I'll use structural editing for an example here, you're always thinking of how things flow together and how the story threads intertwine and connect. You're thinking through how the story will land for a casual reader. There's a lot of work in the background in this case, and it takes practice to be able to point out when elements fall flat. You as an editor should also be able to suggest ways to fix the flat parts of the story -- and to do that you need to have read widely in many genres. Read for the sake of understanding how stories come together. Read while taking extensive mental notes as you go. Each book is a learning opportunity.

How is it different when you read someone else's work vs your own?

I actually just reblogged a post about this that sums it up pretty nicely. When you're writing you're so close to your own work it can be hard not only to spot errors but to let go of work you've written. It can also be difficult to see where your work shines because it's not how you envisioned it in your head. Writing is an entirely different process, even if you can go back in with good editing eyes, again it comes down to perspective. You're too close to your own work. You've spent so much more time with it. You know every detail (presumably) and might not be able to see beyond that. The editor, on the other hand, and also a beta reader, will be able to shift perspectives a bit based on their own biases and specialties and help spot things that weren't obvious in the thick of the project.

For me I know I am not as strong a writer as I am an editor for this exact reason. (Regardless of what others think of my writing, this is still true lol) I get a sort of tunnel vision on what I'm attempting to get on paper. A second set of eyes helps point out what needs more attention. An editor should be a project's biggest cheerleader because our goal is to bring out the best an author can do. We can see the threads of greatness as we go through a piece. When we suggest things, it's always to make the piece stronger and for the story beats to hit harder. So this piece really comes down to perspective. When I read my own work, I still am very much mired in it. When I read someone else's work, I get to experience it without it having lived in my head for x amount of time. It's a fresh view of the text, and that can often be invaluable.

What do you look for, what do you notice differently from when you're in writing mode?

This kind of plays off the last few questions, more or less but here I'll switch to self-editing. It really is a mindset change and it's incredibly difficult on one's own writing. Usually I need to take a day or two to let the chapter (for instance) I'm working on simmer and move on to the next thing to get my mind out of the weeds about it more or less. Then I go back in with the goal to proofread and do line level editing.

Because I am the author, I'm always trying to keep in mind overarching structures and plots. (I'm a planner rather than a pantser/discovery writer normally though there are exceptions when I add to the plan later.) This does make "editing mode" a little bit easier for me, besides being a professional editor. I'm actively trying to keep the threads together in editing mode, and actively looking for accidental repetition, places where fluff can be cut out, areas where the words sound off/discordant and can be improved, and personally I am always trying to be sure each line of dialogue or inner monologue SOUNDS like the point of view character I'm working with. This comes from asking the right questions of your work -- "Why would x character respond this way?" But that's a whole other topic. Someone could ask me about how I handle character building another time if they'd like (: But it's all part of the editing process.

In writing mode the goal, at least for me, is to get the idea out of my head and into a draft / on paper. I have the bones of the story in my outline and now I need to get the words out. First drafts are incredibly important and are not -- I repeat -- are NOT garbage. These are the rough foundations and the effort is not wasted. You can't refine anything if there's nothing on the page. The first draft is gold. It is the authentic creative writing experience. The rest is editing. (: And the revision process, the editing, helps bring forward the gem of an idea you had to begin with.

Any advice to get better at the whole editing thing?

The two biggest pieces of advice I have for this is to read widely and to come to your work with fresh eyes before you attempt to edit.

Reading widely means to read outside of your preferred genre as often as you can. This can also mean reading craft books -- ie things that talk about the writing process or even the editing process -- and it can mean consuming other kinds of media with a focus on storytelling like video games, ttrpgs or movies etc. It also means paying attention while reading, always keeping an eye on your own answer to the question: "Why does this work so well?" or conversely "why do I hate this?" (: Reading critically is a habit that not a lot of us innately have. You do have to put in the work just like with writing to read closely in a way that benefits you as a writer and an editor.

Now for the next part -- walking away from your draft entails two things. One, that you've written all you could before you turned on editing mode and two you've given yourself a day or two to do something else (or continue writing) before you return to what you want to edit. It's so much harder to catch what you're missing when you immediately turn back and edit what you've just written. (With exception.) You can catch more typos, and fix the fluff or underwriting when you've given your mind a second to rest.

Improvement comes with practice, too. So purposefully trying to edit, and purposefully trying to read critically and building a habit out of these things will lead to a better understanding of the craft in general. All of it translates to writing strong first drafts and being able to revise more effectively. It's cumulative. Nobody is born a perfect writer or a perfect editor.

One last tip that might be a little impractical depending on your circumstances is -- if you want to get better at editing quickly, read your work out loud. It's easier to find clunky areas as you verbalize them.

What typical advice that we often see (kill your darlings, never do x, always do x, write for yourself, know your audience...) do you think could use some nuance or explanation?

I could write about each of these but this post is already long! So I'll pick my favorite. "Write what you know" doesn't mean "Stay in your lane and write about your retail job" for example. To me, it's more like even in a fantasy world, you can bring in things you've experienced and give them to your characters.

Not a single one of us is as boring as we think we are (: I learned this when I was going through the Creative Nonfiction track in my undergrad creative writing degree program. Even something so average told from your perspective can be fascinating to someone else. So apply it to your story -- all your experiences, your emotions, whatever you can throw at the canvas so to speak.

Your character isn't a reflection of you if you don't want them to be. But they can still go through a fantasy version of troubles that evoke the same kind of big emotions that you've been through. It can be kind of cathartic -- at least in my experience, it can be.

What advice would you give a starting beta reader? What makes for a good beta reader and/or editor, especially when there's no monetary transaction involved and it's all donated labor? What are some of the essential skills?

So first, the difference between a beta reader and editor does come down to the donation of time. You're going to get different responses based on the skill of your beta reader and how much attention and time they have to donate. The ideal beta reader will be someone who is in your intended audience and is generally a close reader, even if they're not there looking for grammar mistakes or anything like that. They'll have a working idea of their own personal answers to what they feel works well and what doesn't when they read in general.

Generally a beta reader will be a set of eyes that will catch your grammar mistakes and typos but probably won't be providing line level suggestions. They'll function as a light structural editor or work more or less on a chapter level. Some beta readers (like myself because I am also a editor) might donate more time and effort to the project than others and be able to make professional suggestions, but this is not to be expected or requested.

If you're just starting out as a beta reader, it might be good to practice on maybe a published novella or short story first, low stakes because the author can't see your comments. Begin the process of reading widely and asking yourself "Why (or why not) does this work for me as a reader?" "What makes this enjoyable (or not?)" "What is it about this piece that is done well (or not?)" The grammar practice can come later -- refresh on the rules, but again don't worry about being perfect. The biggest skill you can build is reading critically. Practice, practice, practice. And when you offer your skills as a beta reader, let your author know if it's your first piece. Sometimes a very fresh set of eyes are just the thing a project needs, so don't be shy about saying so.

On the skills needed -- beta readers should not be shy to say exactly what they're thinking in a kind, constructive way. This can take some practice. But if you're going to point out something that's not working, it's good to have an idea as to why and be able to convey that. It doesn't have to be to the level of a suggestion and certainly not to the level of a rewrite or being able to provide comps/resources.

Being able to provide comments of your thoughts in a structured and logical way based on your opinion of what you've read comes with practice, of course. It's essential because an author is generally looking for specific feedback when they're asking you to beta read their work to make sure their story is hitting as intended for their intended audience.

Again having a good ear for grammar is going to be important here, too. You don't have to be perfect about it, either, or memorize every tiny technical detail. But being able to hear when something is off is useful again because while writing, an author is very close to their work and might not catch it.

And last -- remind yourself you are human. You aren't going to be able to catch every error. You aren't going to be perfect. (listen, not even every editor is going to catch every single mistake. Again, we're human!) You are not a machine. The act of being a close reader for an author and donating your time to assist them is selfless. Nobody should be expecting perfection. This is a collaborative effort between audience and author in this case. You get to make suggestions and perhaps change an author's mind about the direction of some things in their stories. Authors can choose not to take advice, too, without needing to explain anything at all. It doesn't mean the effort is wasted. It comes down to having a second set of eyes on the project with the intent to bring out the best.

Beta reader or editor, your job is mostly to be the work's cheerleader and see past the rough edges to the gem underneath, and then show the author how truly talented they are when they've forgotten in the thick of it. These are simply two different levels of the same kinds of tasks (:

[troutfur]

Introducing: The Sibling Bonds Rewrite

Bonefall has finally broken me, guys. I'm doing this, just like every other WC fan on this platform. In my hubris I thought I could resist the temptation but alas I too have fallen!

Anyway, this is not going to be one cohesive writing project nor am I going to reorient my blog around it. I do not have it in me to commit to a single thing, much less something as sprawling as this. I am at my heart a writer of short stories and I'll always be throwing around AU ideas and starting new projects.

However, since I'm telling myself from the outset I do not need to actually write for this and it's a project that will be always have lots of things to work on for this perpetual WIP it will easier for me to slip into it and add to it and constantly be iterating. So do expect this to be something I'll try to add to frequently and to become a staple of the blog from here on out.

Plus, as I rework and think through the worldbuilding I am definitely going to be setting up concepts and ideas I will want to have as default to the worldbuilding of all my works.

I am still in the very, very early phases, but as I develop this rewrite concept I aim to:

Expand on character personalities, relationships, and dynamics with the goal of presenting the Clans as more fleshed out and tight-knit small communities.

Flesh out the culture of the Clans, both as a whole and as individual entities. I aim to strike a balance between presenting them as different from each other while also acknowledging that being so close together and with such frequent contact convergence is inevitable.

Portray the religion of the Clans in a way I find more satisfying as a lifelong ancestor worshipper myself, drawing both on my experiential as well as academic knowledge of the subject

Dive deeper into the politics, internal and external, with an emphasis in presenting political conflicts as extensions of familial conflicts. Legacy, dynasty, and entrenched power will all feature prominently without formalizing lines of succession. This way I can give more of a reason for the nepotism without entirely remaking the Clans into hereditary monarchies.

Incorporate more cat behaviors and biology in order to cultivate a semi-realistic feel. This is an area I'm weak in and will certainly require a lot of research from me. But I'm confident it will only strengthen the draw for me.

Center relationships between siblings as the main engine for stories. This is my big one, as you could've guessed from the name. Sibling dynamics are one of my favorite things to see in WC as well as in fiction generally. Writing about cats presents a great opportunity to sneak this theme into just about every character's story, as they are a species in which multiple births are the norm.

I'm going to be tagging everything as #Siblings Bonds Rewrite, for ease of organization as well as for blocking if that's not what you're here for.

Feel free to ask questions too! Sometimes the best thing to get the thoughts going is a good question.

[willothewispwisteriadawn]

This is my last point on the Bennington podcast (hopefully).

Who else has read Stephen King’s memoir? It’s one of my favorite books in existence (even if I don’t agree on every single bit of advice). Anyway, like half that book is on the parts of his real life he lifted for his novels. He directly discusses the 3 people he knew who inspired Carrie and her mom. And I felt like I was rereading It at parts of his memoir. He talks about how he didn’t like college creative writing because everyone is artsy fartsy and fake-profound while he just wanted to hear good stories. And his whole experience with his class was used almost exactly for Bill Denbrough’s— who is is a horror writer!— college experience. He describes his favorite old movie theater which is SO similar to the movie theater scene in It, and his thoughts on it were the kids’ thoughts. And it just goes on and on.

Why can Stephen King write an acclaimed memoir on how his fiction collides with reality, without people treating him as interchangeable with Bill or acting like he’s a fraud for not designing Carrie from scratch. Nobody treats Bill as literally Stephen King even though he’s clearly lifted from his own experience. And it’s framed so weirdly when Tartt does the same stuff with Richard?

There are more examples. Leigh Bardugo wrote Ninth House as someone who went to Yale AND was in a society (Wolf’s Head). Bardugo has said she absolutely loved Yale and has great memories from there, but did feel like there’s a level of privilege and immorality in academia circles that she wanted to comment on.

“Reading ‘Ninth House,’ people might think I have some kind of bone to pick with Yale,” Bardugo said. “And I suppose I do. I have a bone to pick with all institutions that embody a particular kind of privilege. But I also loved my experience at Yale. And I hope that comes through … there’s a reason we long for these hallowed halls and these ivy-covered walls.”

Like ultimately it seems to me like Ninth House and The Secret History tackle dark academia similarly because each the author is open about liking her area of study and her college experience, but also open about how things can easily go too far in these closed-off academic environments.

Not to lose my point. In a way, I just feel like Tartt’s lack of a public presence and commentary on her work has been used against her uncharitably. And I’m really genuinely interested in if someone can tell me the difference between her and King/Bardugo. Why is King seen as cool for using his hometown and his issues with college writing courses to form Bill who shares King’s own opinions? Why is it interesting that Bardugo put a real secret society that she was actually in into her book? But then it seems like a huge shock and betrayal that Tartt may have been looking around her own Greek class for minor inspirations? Is it the negative framing? Because, again, King wrecked his unnamed creative writing teachers. Bardugo’s book openly states that it’s absurd that Wolf’s Head views themselves as champions of civil rights when they were the last society to accept women. Please, someone tell me the difference.