#common pitfalls for writers

[jesncin]

Do you have any thoughts for the Martian Language? Like yes, I know it's supposed to be Earth Names but Weird (Like J'on J'onzz but its just pronounced 'John Jones' even though in my head I always try to spice it up with glottal stops and a lentition on the 'zz') but linguistically why do martians have a language or name system if they are all fully telepathic? Writing I get, but a spoken language… that feels kind of forced.

I do think it's a little silly that Martians have a first name surname situation like 'murican culture haha (J'onn J'onzz isn't pronounced John Jones btw! That's his humanized name/the name he yoinked from a dead detective. I pronounce his Martian name similarly to the DCAU and CW Supergirl show: Jhaohnzz Jhaonzz?? lol but there's also the YJa version Juh-ohn Juh-onzz which I get but I don't like the staccato-esque pronunciation subjectively. It makes pronouncing Ma'al's name like cussing lol), but for the most part I don't think it's weird for Martians to have a spoken language! It's just an additional way to communicate on top of a "mainstream" way of conversing (telepathically).

I like how this was expanded on in Orlando and Rossmo's MM solo! Spoken language is called "Voiced Words" and there's the vibe it's considered the more rude/rudimentary way of communicating, but it's also discreet because it can't be caught on the telepathic wifi thoughtstream. So spoken language has narrative and cultural significance in this story. Technically it always has been if we acknowledge Ma'al as a disabled non-telepath Martian, he would have to speak with Voiced Words at least in canon.

Think about it, us humans have multiple means of communication too right? On an able-bodied standard: we can speak words, we have body language, we can write, or communicate with Morse Code. To broaden that, we have sign language, and Braille too! It's not redundant to have multiple ways of communication, and some forms of communication offer expression in ways the others can't. You can say you love someone, but hugging them can do that too in a different way. You can sing it, even- if you're a theatre kid. And it's cultural! Even though Deaf people took up less than a quarter of Martha's Vineyard population, nearly everyone used the local sign language there for a time. That's not even covering different languages as a whole.

That's how I see Martian telepathy as- another form of communication and culture unique to Martian expression. With that, I don't see why they can't have names. They still have to refer to each other somehow! I would adore it if Martians had multiple languages though. Carl Lumbly joked that he sung in "Northern Martian" for J'onn in the Christmas episode and that is forever melted into my brain.

[mehmetyildizmelbourne-blog]

Substack Mastery Book: Chapter 8

Why Readers Pay for Substack Newsletters and What Type of Content Fails to Attract Subscribers Dear beta readers, Thank you for your valuable feedback on the previous seven chapters, which is helping me refine this book and enhance it as a valuable resource for fellow writers. I have covered seven critical aspects that have helped many readers jumpstart their Substack journey. Receiving…

[novlr]

How would i politely describe body types without being vague?

Characters are as diverse as the writers who write about them, but when it comes to describing them, it can be very easy to default to what we know or to succumb to clichés or stereotypes. This can be especially challenging when describing characters’ bodies. When you need to describe body types, it’s really important to strike a balance between being specific and respectful while avoiding harmful stereotypes or vague descriptions.

Why description matters

Description is essential to really bring a reader into a scene and connect with the characters you’re writing about. Physical descriptions help readers visualise characters, which, in turn, can influence story dynamics. Body descriptions can reveal a lot about a character and even affect the way that other characters interact with them. Like people in real life, the way we look influences both who we are and how we interact with the world. 

As a personal example, I am quite short, but I have very long limbs. This gives me the illusion of being tall. Consequently, I am often asked by people taller than me to help them get things down from high shelves because they perceive me as taller than I am. This is a common interaction in my life that has changed the way I dress and carry myself. You probably have similar anecdotes in your own life, which is why building those descriptions into your characters can be such a great way to really make them feel real. How a character looks is not all they are, but it does help create a well-rounded sense of character if we get a feel for how they interact with the world around them.

General guidelines to describe body types

Thoughtful representation matters in modern writing. Descriptions should exist to make your characters feel like people and not like stereotypes. To achieve this, you must:

Focus on relevant details that serve the story — don’t just describe a person’s body because you feel you need to. Everything, even character description should exist to serve the story.

Avoid loaded terms or judgmental language.

Use specific, relevant details rather than general statements for the sake of it. 

Consider the character’s own perspective of their body instead of only through the eyes of other characters.

Include dynamic descriptions that show how the character moves and interacts with their environment to give a sense of who they are instead of info-dumping a description.

Common pitfalls to avoid

Don’t make a character’s body type a central part of your narrative if it isn’t plot-relevant.

Don’t rely on stereotypes or clichés.

Avoid using food-related metaphors, as they’re often problematic.

Don’t make assumptions about health or lifestyle based on appearance. Only include this information if it is relvant to the story you’re telling and you’ve researched and fact-checked to ensure its accuracy.

Don’t over-focus on your character’s body as a defining character trait.

Don’t use derogatory or outdated terminology.

Don’t over-describe body type to avoid saying what you mean. Fat and skinny aren’t dirty words. Short and tall don’t have an implicit bias. You can be direct. In fact, it’s often better to be direct in your description than to labour over someone’s body in minute detail.

Effective techniques to incorporate body types in the narrative

Describe clothing and style choices.

Show how the character navigates their environment and how their personality shines through movement.

Consider cultural and historical context.

Include relevant occupational influences on physique or vice versa.

Reference genetic or familial physical traits when relevant.

Include distinctive characteristics or style choices that aren’t related to their body type.

Note how the character’s appearance changes in different situations (i.e., dressed up or casual, at home or at work).

Focus on functional strength and capability outside of their body type.

Consider historical context if writing historical fiction and be aware of changing beauty standards.

Avoid cultural stereotypes and generalisations.

Don’t make a character’s body the centre of their story if it’s not relevant to the plot.

Use precise, specific language – don’t beat around the bush. Say what you mean.

Choose words that match the tone of your story.

Describing body types doesn’t have to be a minefield. Writing a character respectfully doesn’t require any more technical knowledge than simply writing them like a real person. While description is important for reader immersion, it’s also not something you need to focus on in too much detail if it’s not relevant to the plot. 

Describe body types in a way that serves your story. Every character’s physical description should contribute to their overall characterisation and your story’s themes, and never distract from it. Physical description is just one aspect of character development, so the most respectful way to describe a character’s body type is to make it a natural part of who they are and not the focus. 

[alpaca-clouds]

Worldbuild Differently: Unthink Religion

This week I want to talk a bit about one thing I see in both fantasy and scifi worldbuilding: Certain things about our world that we live in right now are assumed to be natural, and hence just adapted in the fantasy world. With just one tiny problem: They are not natural, and there were more than enough societies historically that avoided those pitfalls.

Tell me, if you have heard this one before: You have this fantasy world with so many differnet gods that are venerated. So what do you do to venerate those gods? Easy! You go into those big temple structures with the stained glass in their windows, that for some reason also use incense in their rituals. DUH!

Or: Please, writers, please just think one moment on why the fuck you always just want to write Christianity. Because literally no other religion than Christianity has buildings like that! And that has to do a lot with medieval and early post-medieval culture. I am not even asking you to look into very distant cultures. Just... Look of mosques and synagogues differ from churches. And then maybe look at Roman and Greek temples. That is all I am asking.

Let's make one thing clear: No matter what kind of world you are building, there is gonna be religion. It does not matter if you are writing medieval fantasy, stoneage fantasy, or some sort of science fiction. I know that a lot of atheists hate the idea that a scifi world has religion, but... Look, human brains are wired to believe in the paranormal. That is simply how we are. And even those atheists, that believe themselves super rational, do believe in some weird stuff that is about as scientific as any religions. (Evolutionary Psychology would be such an example.)

What the people will believe in will differ from their circumstance and the world they life in, but there is gonna be religion of some sort. Because we do need some higher power to blame, we need the rituals of it, and we need the community aspect of it.

Ironically I personally am still very much convinced that IRL even in a world like the Forgotten Realms, people would still make up new gods they would pray to, even with a whole pantheon of very, very real gods that exist. (Which is really sad, that this gets so rarely explored.)

However, how this worship looks like is very different. Yes, the Abrahamitic religions in general do at least have in common that they semi-regularily meet in some sort of big building to pray to their god together. Though how much the people are expected to go into that temple to pray is actually quite different between those religions and the subgroups of those religions.

Other religions do not have this though. Some do not have those really big buildings, and often enough only a select few are even allowed into the big buildings - or those might only be accessible during some holidays.

Instead a lot of polytheistic religions make a big deal of having smaller shrines dedicated to some of the gods. Often folks will have their own little shrine at home where they will pray daily. Alternatively there are some religions where there might be a tiny shrine outside that people will go to to pray to.

Funnily enough that is also something I have realized Americans often don't quite get: Yeah, this was a thing in Christianity, too. In Europe you will still find those tiny shrines to certain saints (because technically speaking Christianity still works as a polytheistic religion, only that we have only one god, but a lot of saints that take over the portfolios of the polytheistic gods). I am disabled, and even in the area I can reach on foot I know of two hidden shrines. One of them is to Mary, and one... I am honestly not sure, as the masonry is too withered to say who was venerated there. Usually those shrines are bieng kept in a somewhat okay condition by old people, but yeah...

Of course, while with historically inspired fantasy settings make this easy (even though people still hate their research), things get a bit harder with science fiction.

Again, the atheist idea is often: "When we develop further scientifically, we will no longer need religion!" But I am sorry, folks. This is not how the human brain works. We see weird coincidences and will go: "What paranormal power was responsible for it?" We can now talk about why the human brain has developed this way. We are evolved to find patterns, and we are evolved (because social animal and such) to try and understand the will others have - so far that we will read will in nature. It is simply how our brains work.

So, what will scifi cultures believe in? I don't know. Depends on your worldbuilding. Maybe they believe in the ghost in the machine, maybe there si some other religions there. You can actually go very wild with it. But you need to unthink the normativity of Christianity to do that. And that is... what I see too little off.

[bettsfic]

I have this thing where what I'm writing is absolutely not what I'm about in real life. I like complexity and depth in what I read. But the things I care about make only vague appearances in my writing, I don't know how to fully explain it. I have a lot of passion in life and I'm ~relatively emotionally intelligent. I'm curious about emotions, anyway, but what comes out in my writing is just cookie cutter.... Bland..... Zero complexity or emotional exploration. It's like I'm on autopilot when I write and I can't shake it.

i'm about to present to you yet another writing spectrum: director-writers and actor-writers.

a director-writer creates stories by writing discrete scenes that they see in their mind. like a film, a scene begins, something happens, a scene ends. we move on to the next scene. i would venture to say a majority of writers today are director-writers, because what's been en vogue in the 21st century is very much influenced by our visual media. we watch visual media. a great many writers like to render their prose such that it feels like a reader is watching the story play out. these director-writers are standing on the outside looking in, manipulating and moving all the pieces of their story to create the desired end result.

director-writing is so common that i meet many, many writers who trap themselves in scenic prose because they assume that's what "good writing" is. these writers are not actually directors. they don't want to be standing behind the camera; they want to be in the mind of the characters. and those people are actor-writers.

an actor-writer's prose doesn't necessarily prioritize scenes one after the next, but develops a compelling narrative voice. actor-writing is about learning to be someone who isn't you. i think the moment you abandon the forced witness of the camera and instead dive into the mind, experiencing the story instead of rendering the story, you unlock the path of that complex emotional exploration you feel is missing in your work. and you will probably never go back.

here's an activity to try:

whatever you're working on right now, open a new doc, take your main character and, in your mind's eye, trap them in an interrogation room. sit them across from you. ask them, "what is your deal?" write down their answer.

in this activity, you're looking for a few things:

what is their story? why does it matter to them? (this is probably the biggest problem i have with the pitfalls of director-writing: nothing matters. everything is just...happening. as a reader, i'm always looking for what i'm being asked to love. maybe that love is awful, toxic, contradictory, ambivalent, whatever. the point is, it matters. a huge percentage of the things i read never ask me to love anything.)

are they trying to convince or persuade you of something, making their testimonial unreliable? or are they confessing to you things they'd never admit to anyone else?

what is at stake for them? what is their deepest desire and their greatest fear? in what way is their deepest desire flawed? how is their greatest fear irrational? how have the events of their story influenced or distorted their perception?

close narration offers us the greatest possible access to the interiority of the narrator. first person is really just a monologue, an explanation, an excuse, a confession, a plea, a prayer. so so so many writers get blocked because they're trying to See the story instead of Listen to it. they force themselves into this elastic third person where the reader remains a distant witness with the occasional thought, insight, or feeling, but that comes second to what i call Bodies in Space. if i never read another "he strode across the room" again it'll be too soon. imagery is wonderful, don't get me wrong, but i would always, always rather get insight into what a character is feeling, thinking, grieving, dreaming than the knowledge that they are sitting in a chair.

i'm not saying switch to first person. you can create the effect of first person with very close third, and you can create the effect of third person with very distant first. pronouns don't really matter. what's important is voice over vision.

i say this a lot, but if i want to watch a story, i'll turn on my tv. prose is the only art form that allows us to fully explore human consciousness. let it do the thing it was invented to do.

my theory of director-writers and actor-writers is adapted from Percy Lubbock's The Craft of Fiction, in which he defines "picture" vs. "drama" writing. however i found that terminology confusing and poorly articulated, so i flipped it into a process-based approach with what i hope is more accessible phrasing. also, prose = consciousness is from 13 Ways of Looking at the Novel by Jane Smiley.

[hayatheauthor]

Blog Posts Masterlist

Here are all the blogs I've written sorted according to six categories and a lot of sub categories.

Post Writing (Publishing):

Querying/Getting Published

How To Get Published As A Minor—A Step-By-Step Guide

How To Get Out Of The Slush Pile And Make Your Agent Say Yes

How To Answer Some Common Literary Agent Questions

The Rejection Checklist: Manuscript Pitfalls to Avoid

Editing

Everything You Need To Know Before Editing Your Manuscript

How To Eliminate Passive Voice From Your Manuscript

Pre Writing:

WIP building

Ten Dos And Don'ts Of Worldbuilding

How To Name Your Characters

A Step-by-Step Guide to Crafting a Compelling Storyline

How to Pick The Perfect Weapon For Your Characters

Writing tools

How To Hook Your Readers With Your Chapter's Starting And Ending

How To Write And Create A Sub Plot

How To Immerse Your Readers With Indirect Characterisation

First or Third Person? How To Choose The Right POV for Your Story

Genre-Based Advice:

Fantasy

How To Build A Realistic Magic System

Things To Consider When Writing With Mythologies

Tips To Consider When Writing A Fantasy Religious Story

Horror/Thriller

How To Get Away With Murder...As An Author

How To Get Away With Murder Part Two: Writing Murder Mysteries

How To Build Tension And Make Your Readers Feel Scared

Romance

Crafting Asexual Romance: Navigating Emotional Intimacy in Fiction

Character-Based Advice:

How To Write An Antagonist

How To Create Realistic Book Characters

How To Write A Compelling Character Arc

How To Create A Morally Grey Character

How To Write A Plot Device Character

How To Develop A Memorable Antagonist

Writing Believable Teenage Characters: Dos and Don'ts

Crafting Character Voices And Distinct Dialogue

Crafting Authentic Child Characters: From Toddlers to Tweens

How To Create And Execute Unreliable Narrators

How To Write Immortal Characters in Fiction

Creatures/Monsters

How To Write Mythical Creatures Without Sounding Redundant

How To Write Vampires With An Original Twist

'Sensitive' character topics:

How To Write POC Characters Without Seeming Racist

How To Write A Disabled Character: Ten Dos And Don'ts

How To Write And Research Mental Illnesses

Resources And Advice For Writing Abusive Parents

Scene-Based Advice:

How To Build Tension And Make Your Readers Feel Scared

Four Tips On How To Make Your Plot Twist Work

How To Set The Scene Without Info Dumping

Writing A Creepy Setting: Tips And Examples

The Dos and Don'ts of Writing Flashbacks in Fiction

Crafting Realistic Car Accidents in Fiction: A Writer's Guide

Writing Rage: How To Make Your Characters Seem Angry

Crafting Sad Scenes: Writing Tears and Emotional Depth

Fights, poison, pain

How To Accurately Describe Pain In Writing

How To Create A Well-Written Fight Scene

The Ultimate Guide To Writing Persuasive Arguments

Forgining Epic Battles: Techniques For Writing Gripping War Scenes

The Writer's Guide to Authentic Wounds and Fatalities

Ink And Venom: A Writer’s Guide To Poisonous Prose

Everything You Need To Know About Writing Stab Wounds

Everything You Need to Know About Writing Burns

Everything You Need To Know About Writing Gunshot Wounds

Everything You Need To Know About Writing Bruises

Recommendations:

Websites And Writing Apps Every Author Needs in 2023

Seven Blogs You Need To Read As An Author

Ten Websites Every Author Should Know In 2024

Series

Writing Wounds

Writing Mythical Creatures With A Unique Twist

Writing Emotions

[slayingfiction]

Unlocking the Power of Dialogue Tags in Fictional Writing

In the realm of fictional writing, dialogue is not just about what characters say; it's also about how they say it. This is where dialogue tags come into play. Often overlooked, these small phrases can dramatically transform your storytelling, offering readers insights into your characters' emotions, intentions, and personalities. Let's delve into the art of using dialogue tags effectively in fictional writing.

What are Dialogue Tags?

Dialogue tags are brief phrases that accompany dialogue, identifying the speaker and often describing how something is said. Classic examples include 'said', 'asked', and 'replied'. However, the world of dialogue tags is vast and varied, allowing writers to add depth and color to their conversations.

The Importance of Variety

While 'said' is a workhorse in dialogue tags, being unobtrusive and easily overlooked, overusing it can render your writing monotonous. Introducing variety is key. Consider using tags like 'whispered', 'shouted', 'murmured', or 'exclaimed' to convey emotions and volume. But beware, overuse of overly descriptive tags can distract the reader. The trick is to strike a balance.

Conveying Action and Emotion

Dialogue tags can do much more than identify who is speaking. They can also convey action and emotion. For instance, 'she said, slamming the door' instantly tells the reader about the character's emotional state. Using action-oriented dialogue tags can also help in reducing the adverb usage, which often clutters writing.

The Subtlety of Beats

Sometimes, it's effective to replace dialogue tags with action beats. Action beats are small actions or descriptions that interrupt dialogue. For example:

"Are you okay?" John leaned forward, concern etching his face.

Here, 'John leaned forward' acts as a beat, breaking up the dialogue and adding a layer of description.

Avoiding Common Pitfalls

One common pitfall in using dialogue tags is redundancy. Saying 'she yelled loudly' can be tautological since yelling is inherently loud. Additionally, avoid overly creative dialogue tags that can confuse the reader. Stick to simplicity where it adds value.

Using Dialogue Tags for Pacing

Dialogue tags can also control the pacing of your narrative. A quick back-and-forth conversation with minimal tags can speed up the pace, making the scene feel urgent or intense. Conversely, adding descriptive tags and beats can slow down the dialogue, allowing for deeper emotional impact.

Conclusion

In conclusion, dialogue tags are a powerful tool in a writer's arsenal. They provide clarity, convey emotions, and enhance the rhythm of your narrative. By mastering their use, you can elevate your fictional writing, creating stories that resonate deeply with your readers. Remember, in the dance of dialogue, tags are your rhythm - use them to make your story sing.

Don’t forget our Grand Opening Giveaway starts February 1st/24 on Tumblr, Instagram and slayingfiction.com! You don’t want to miss it!

Happy Writing!

[sandraharissa]

How did they accidentally intimately understand the experiences of mentally ill ppl in s1??? How??? It’s gotta be cos the writers changed right

Ok bcos like, it’s not like Jinx in s1 was a good portrayal of mental illnesses in the sense that it was realistic. I’d actually argue that part of her appeal and what made her work so well is bcos she was undiagnosable. She showed many symptoms of what could be many different issues and so many ppl could relate to her on a basis of one symptom. But what they did with Jinx that made her work so well is that they seemingly understood the emotions and psychology that are shared by ppl with all types of different issues. They didn’t need to understand all the technicalities in terms of, like I said, a realistic portrayal of a specific issue. What mattered was that she felt like a really mentally ill person cos her arc dealt with the struggles of mentally ill ppl. She was portrayed to feel isolated, struggling to communicate/socialize, feeling like she was fundamentally wrong/different, like she inherently didn’t belong anywhere, frustrated with her own symptoms, having internalized guilt, a desire to be loved/accepted, feeling unlovable, trying to hide her issues/symptoms, futilely trying to fit/change her behavior to fit/pass, feeling like a failure etc.

The main betrayal of s2 when it comes to Jinx and her arc was violating that connection that ppl build with Jinx in s1. S2 Jinx is an extremely unrealistic, unrelatable and sanitized portrayal of mental issues.

99% of her symptoms disappeared after she experienced smth that would drastically exacerbate them. Are you pranking me? Is that what I’m supposed to relate to? Quick fixes were applied, like giving her Isha to fix her loneliness but 1)that’s not how raising a child while mentally ill would look like, it would make her struggles worse 2) they cease to portray crucial experiences of mental illness like feeling like you don’t belong cos your behavior is always off, these things don’t just disappear, even when ppl get better there’ll still be these moments, and that’s in a best case scenario. Like trans ppl after finishing treatment saying they got rid of 99% of their dysphoria, but never a 100%. look at how they expertly managed to portray Silco and Jinx having a close loving bond and simultaneously highlight her loneliness and isolation. So she has a kid now bcos single mothers are not famously lonely and isolated ppl right? It was a common point of criticism of Silco that Jinx not having friends amongst her peers is a really bad sign but now she still has no friends but now 1) it stopped being an issue 2) she’s also a single mother now.

The focus was switched from her being portrayed as likely born neurodivergent + traumatized to depression but specifically suicidality. it’s not like in s1 she wasn’t portrayed as depressed/suicidal and you’d think she’d become more so after s1 but that wasn’t the sole focus, but curiously it becomes so in s2. But despite this switch in focus that you’d think would stem from the writers wanting to write about their own experiences or smth that interests them that they think is important it couldn’t be clearer that the writers had zero empathy for the issues they were writing about cos it’s misery porn, a pitfall that many stories that center suicide fall into, glamorizing and romanticizing it. In s1 her worst symptoms like hallucinations were very dramatic and cool-looking visually but it was connected to this fundamental empathy, the understanding of mentally ill ppl as ppl with emotions and what those are. In s2 they drastically switch the portrayal of her issues to fit what they wanted to do with her in s2, and then proceeded to use it solely for cool and dramatic imagery/scenarios. It is completely disconnected from ppl’s real life experiences. The relatability was sacrificed for the sake of following tropes like 'death as redemption' that are supposed to be more dramatic or smth. Having her ping-pong from having no issues to having all the issues throughout the narrative.

Act1: She’s ‘dead inside’, she seems somewhat motivated at some point only for it to be revealed she was planning suicide – alright season, nice, what’s next. Act2: she’s just completely alright now from the get go, her hallucinations show up only when she first finds out Isha’s in danger. why? who knows. It’s like the writers understood that for them that would be a particularly stressful situation so they use the imagery of her illness to communicate she’s super distressed in this moment. So they used the imagery of mental illness not to convey mental illness and how it interacts with her life but as a dramatic-looking shortcut to convey a strong emotion, one that any other character would feel in this situation. Otherwise she’s doing better than she ever was, even in s1a1, and then Isha dies. Act3: so now she 100% ’wants to die’ again and it’s super depresso but then she has one conversation with Ekko and she’s again doing super good and then she dies by semi-suicide but she’s happy doing it and it’s like. beautiful? ok.

[imbecominggayer]

What Are Archetypes And How To Use Them!

Character archetypes are one of the many tools in a writer's arsenal to write believable and universally relatable characters which transcend geography, time, and culture!

Throughout this post, I will be discussing what archetypes are, how to use them, and how to subvert them.

What Are Character Archetypes?

What are character archetypes? Archetypes are kinda like templates that are grouped into categories depending on their traits, experiences, and actions.

When thinking about "archetypes", your mind may jump to the archetypes in the major Arcana which represent different aspects of life! Like character archetypes, the archetypes represented in the Arcana encompass a multitude of various traits, experiences, and meanings depending on the reader of the tarot or, with character archetypes), interpretations by the author!

Archetypes are meant to transcend time, geography, location, and the differences between other individuals to communicate universal truths about humanity.

But it's important to use archetypes correctly! All characters require character development and if you don't use character development or there isn't enough character then the characters are going to be flat, boring, and unoriginal.

The difference between "stock characters" and "archetypes" is the fact that stock characters aren't meant to be main characters. Stock characters are the strict librarian that tells the lovers to be quiet, the mean bully that gets humiliated, or the MC's lovingly dead mom.

They are static, flat characters who are meant to serve as filler. Archetypes are the foundation to create complex, changing characters!

Mixing Character Archetypes

Most characters fall into multiple character archetypes depending on the perspective that you are looking at. Mixing character archetypes allows your characters to be familiar but not cliche!

Character Archetypes (And How To Subvert Them)

There are way too many archetypes so I'm just going to give a quick run-by!

The Caregiver

The caregiver is a character who selflessly and whole-heartedly supports their loved ones. They often tend to fall into the Mentor role, the Best Friend role, or something else. It's common to see the Caregiver as an accompanying character to the Hero.

Traits: Selfless, Kind, Compassionate, Honorable, Loving

Pitfalls: Too selfless, tends to lack growth or goals, a bit too dedicated to assholes

Subvert: Caregiver can serve as an enabling force who encourages the Hero or the Villain to follow all of their desires and will force their loved one to deny any healthy accountability for their bad behavior. The Caregiver can be a shallow individual who has a tendency of nearly abandoning the group when things seem hopeless. The Caregiver can show some selfishness

Everyman

The Everyman is your regular Joe-Shmoe who isn't smart enough to be a Mad Scientist but not dumb enough to be the resident Idiot. They aren't particular ugly nor particularly attractive (but they tend to get the love interest anyway). They are kinda average in most respects.

The Everyman is humble and cooperative but not stand out.

Traits: Humble, Hard-working, Grounded, Relatable, Cooperative

Pitfalls: This is the protagonist for 95% of stories. Tends to flail around so much that the audience wonders why they are even needed.

Subvert: The Everyman tends to fall into the Innocent type. Basically, oblivious as all heck and a bystander. The Everyman could be a secret mastermind behind the whole operation and more aware than anyone suspects.

The Creator

Constantly creative and constantly making something. Their creation can be physical (inventor) or in the divine sense. To the Creator, there is nothing that is more important than what they are trying to make, and they are willing to sacrifice themselves and others to reach their goal.

Traits: Obsession, imaginative, strong-willed, egotistical

Pitfalls: The Creator tends to be unsympathetic and not that obviously relatable to the non-creative types.

Subvert: Actually try and make this Mad Scientist or God relatable. Many people have that one thing that they would sacrifice their time and life for whether that be their job, their family, their identity, or their creative pursuits. Connecting that creation to these universal truths will turn your one-dimensional character into a tragedy or masterpiece.

The Explorer

They want to break boundaries, take risks, and travel the world for something new. They yearn for something more than a normal life. They want to find their purpose and they don't believe their purpose lies in the mundane life everyone wants them to live.

Traits: Courageous, independent, nonconforming, driven, curious

Pitfalls: Explorer types tend to be the garden-variety " I want to explore this place". Highly common protagonists.

Subvert: Have the Explorer be a little bit lost in the world. They aren't courageous about their desires and they don't even really know what they want. They just know they don't want to spend the rest of their life here. They are afraid of stagnation. They are afraid of looking back on their life and only being able to feel regret. Make it spiritual. Make it about fear.

The Hero

The Hero rises to the challenge. They can't or refuse to stand by any longer to the injustice surrounding them. They fight the villains.

Traits: Honorable, Justice-Orientated, Strong

Pitfalls: One-Dimensional. "really? another story about Superman going rogue and killing people because angst?"

Subvert: At this point, having a character who is genuinely a good person who wants to try and be a good person is a subversion. Seriously, if you can only write an interesting character when they are evil or "morally complicated", they you are putting yourself in a box. They aren't perfect but they try. That's the thesis statement for heroes.

The Innocent

The Innocent is defined by their unending optimism and naivety with a child-life attitude (if they aren't an actual child). The Innocent tends to be the starting place for a character who will eventually have their comfortable life radically shifted by worldly events until their ignorance is swept away from them.

Traits: Trusting, Loving, Sincere, Open, Powerless, Oblivious

Pitfalls: So innocent to the point where they are obnoxious and not relatable to anyone above the age of 7. "Why is a man who has the ignorance of a child the Chosen One?"

Subvert: What if the Innocent isn't this childish person but actually acts serious? A story could have a character going on this journey to become the Innocent in an effort to get rid of their memories of the horrors of life that they have deemed unbearable. And they succeed. The Innocent could be someone whose naivety about the world often has them acting in cruel and insensitive ways.

The Lover

Ranging from the hedonistic players to the dreamy romantics, Lovers are guided by their heart. Like Creators, they also have an all-consuming obsession and dedication, although, in this case, the object of their obsession is the receiver of their love whether that be a person or an object.

They often overlap with the Caregiver.

‍Traits: Devoted, compassionate, caring, protective

Pitfalls: They often tend to be one-dimensional and horribly problematic.

Subvert: The recipient of their love could be an object, a friend, or a family member. Their love could also be demonstrated as purposefully toxic as their codepedent traits have the potential to intersect with Superior Complexes, Inferiority Complexes, and/or Savior Complexes.

The Rags-To-Riches Orphan

While not always a literal orphan, the Orphan starts in a state of poverty and unimportance who transitions into a life of opulence and excitement.

Beyond that, Orphans tend to fall into Found Families, as a desire for belonging often reunites them with either social outcasts or the Riches group.

‍Traits: Survivalists, empathetic, determined, driven

‍Pitfalls:  Another orphan? Really? Wow, you got picked up off the street and became unbelievablely rich? How relatable.

Subvert: The Orphan uses their skills and resources from their time in poverty to secure power, influence, and popularity from the masses as their relatable upbringing, connects to the underground market, and survivalist mentality leads them to be even more cunning and manipulative than the natural-born. The Orphan isn't as innocent and ignorant as everyone seems to think they're. The Orphan falls from their rich status. The Orphan hates their found family and relishes in the opportunity to leave them.

The Rebel

The Rebel leads the charge against flawed leaders and power structures when the balance of society is threatened. They might be the public head of a rebellion, a charismatic outsider, someone who works in the shadows, or just someone whose another James Dean- knock-off.

‍Traits: Natural leaders, courageous, inspiring, strong, charismatic

Pitfalls: Romancization of rebel groups and abusive behaviors as , more often than not, rebel groups establish a new order that is the same or even worse than the previous group.

Subvert: What if we didn't contribute to the massive romantization of rebel authority and instead investigated how extremists groups can manipulate desperate citizens into horrible governments. Because Hitler was a rebel who instigated a national rebellion. What if we explored the topic of co-option as previous signs of rebelliousness and civil rights are being commercialized for right-wing non-pocs and "rebellious" teens?

The Mentor

The Mentor is the character who is typically off in the corner, training the protagonist with life advice such as "life happens man" and "if you klll a killer, that's somehow worse than being that killer".

Because writers don't know how to write actual wisdom so they copy facebook quotes and look up a thesarus for some "fancy" words

‍Traits: "Wise", caring, patient, insightful, rational

Pitfalls: "Author! Arthor! This a serious topic with a huge diversity of variables and an imperfect solution as humans are inherently imperfect! This advice seems really oversimplified and kinda biased!

Subvert: What if the mentor's teachings are revealed to be heavily biased and based on misinformation which is reflective of the mentor's upbringing? What if the mentor is secretly working with the antagonist to feed the fledgling Hero with false beliefs? What if the mentor genuinely hates the Hero but is still on Team Good Guys?

[thewriteadviceforwriters]

How to Write Sci-Fi Fantasy Books: Short Guide For Writers

Writing sci-fi fantasy books is an exciting journey into the world of imagination. It offers the author an opportunity to create new worlds, explore futuristic technologies, and delve into the complexities of magical systems. This blog post will guide you through the process of writing a compelling sci-fi fantasy book and help you avoid common pitfalls along the way.

Establish Your World

Your world is the stage on which your story unfolds. It needs to be richly detailed and logically consistent to make your readers believe in its existence. Start by defining the physical characteristics of your world, its history, culture, and societal norms. You can build your world from scratch or you can base it on existing real-world or fictional cultures. Remember, the world you create should serve your story and not the other way around.

Develop Your Characters

Characters are the heart of your story. They are the ones who make your readers care about what happens in your world. Your characters should be well-rounded, with their own strengths, weaknesses, hopes, and fears. You should know your characters inside out, including their backstories, even if it's not all revealed in the book. Also, remember that your characters don't have to be human. They can be aliens, magical beings, or sentient robots, to name a few.

Craft Your Plot

Your plot is the sequence of events that make up your story. It should be engaging, with conflicts and resolutions that keep your readers on the edge of their seats. Your plot should also be tightly woven with your world and characters. For instance, the challenges your characters face should be a direct result of the world you've created, and their actions and decisions should drive the plot forward. Also, don't forget to incorporate elements unique to the sci-fi and fantasy genres, such as advanced technology or magic.

Writing a sci-fi fantasy book is no easy task, but with careful planning and execution, it can be a rewarding experience. Remember to establish a solid world, develop compelling characters, and craft an engaging plot. Allow your imagination to soar, but also keep the rules of your world consistent. Lastly, enjoy the process and take pride in the unique world you've created. Happy writing!

[lemonhemlock]

I did not get into Game of thrones when it first started airing. In fact, I waited until it was long past it's heyday (around s6 or 7) to check it out because the marketing and the conversation surrounding it misled me into thinking it was nothing more than "grimdark" bullshit. As one famous YouTuber sarcastically called it "hot fantasy that fucks." So, I avoided Martin's work for literal years due to the impression that I got from online reactors and show-only casuals who did as you and a few others have described as his work being fundamentally misinterpreted.

Fortunately, I overcame my hang-ups, purchased the books (even the supplementary material) and fell down an entire rabbit hole of ASOIAF which led me to recognizing that this world he spent decades creating is far more complex than what had been portrayed onscreen. Regardless of the possibility of the books remaining unfinished (which I am fine with, personally), what George has created is a genuine work of art that I imagine took a tremendous amount of time and energy. So, for so many people online to behave like children and throw tantrums because they feel entitled to him (ew) instead of ushering forth more reasonable conversations and legitimate debates about the nature of his situation frankly makes me look at this fandom with a heavy dose of skepticism.

It is truly baffling to hear even professional critics and see articles describing George as being "ungrateful" or "unprofessional" when it has been well-documented just how often authors get locked out of the adaptation process and left to the wayside as consultants. Look at what happened to Rick Riordan and Christopher Paolini! George R.R. Martin is not the only author to have qualms with how a multimillion dollar studio has mishandled his creative work, and to act like he should remain silent just because he's amassed a certain degree of wealth is quite frankly, ridiculous. He shouldn't have to settle down, be grateful, and stay quiet because the greedy corporate executives and their media drones will get offended by actual criticism that could alter the perception of the adaption being revealed as mediocre for having departed from the source material.

TLDR: authors should be allowed to speak up about their art being sacrificed for commercialization.

Thank you so much for this message, anon! This needs to be talked about more, because I don't think a lot of commentators truly understand the vulgar, late-capitalistic sheen that seems to set in and slowly poison any ASOIAF adaptation. It honestly baffles me how quick some members of this fandom are to rush to the defense of, what is essentially (let's not be kidding ourselves here), a cashgrab by a giant corporation to the detriment of the actual artist and the actual creative foundation behind it.

Why else would "MAX" (if that is even their name) make another (or several other) ASOIAF adaptations? Not to stay true to any philosophical aesthetic vision, as it has become more than apparent with Season 2, but to increase shareholder profits by appealing to the lowest common denominator. Even the basic premise has been shifted in order to address popular trends and satisfy the mindless consumer that doesn't want to engage with anything deeper than their favourite tropes, prettily packaged:

from a story about a doomed ouroborous family superimposed on the pitfalls of feudalism, with villainy and heroism to be found on both sides, it has been simplified and reduced to a narrative that exalts white feminism and disqualifies anyone who opposes its girlboss protagonist. This is Sheryl Sandberg's version of Fire and Blood.

Truly, I think Sara Hess did (unintentionally) outline it the best: "civilians don't matter in Game of Thrones". They don't matter in Game of Thrones, but they matter in A Song of Ice and Fire. The entire heart of the series is contained in Septon Maribald's speech. The writers "kind of", must have forgotten, though.

[gobbogoo]

Twin Moon Knight Rellana has the best rendition of "boob-armour" I've seen in fiction:

Edit: Why'd Tumblr mark this as mature??

Why The Trope Is Usually Dumb and Bad:

In general, an effective suit of armour needs padding underneath to absorb blows, meaning it shouldn't fit so tightly around the chest as to require a built-in bra, and the common boob-armour divot used to define cleavage only serves to direct attacks directly into the chest. It's impractical to both make and wear. That COULD be used by a smart writer to say something about the character wearing it, but almost always it's just fan-service at the cost of the story's cohesion, with no deeper meaning.

Now let's look at Rellana's armour:

Why Rellana's Armour is Cool and Good:

Rellana's armour was carefully designed to avoid all the common pitfalls. First and foremost, there's no cleavage! Instead, they've taken a cinched-waist breastplate that normally utilizes an hourglass shape (example below), and added subtle definitions that get the point across without sacrificing protective capabilities. Sure, it's still more form-fitting than real armour, but that's standard for From Software's stylized armour designs.

Next, the armour directly aligns with the character and setting it's found in/on. Rellana isn't some standard soldier; she's ex-royalty, which opens up a rarely-accessed avenue of historical precedent. The ceremonial armour of nobility was RIFE with impractical designs made only to show off. Enormous codpieces, crazy skirts, breastplates with sculpted pecs and abs, etc. (also see below)

Now, it's still impractical to FIGHT in ceremonial armour, but Carian Nobility (and ER as a whole) already has a well-established tendency of doing so. Plus, it aligns directly with what we know of Rellana's character: she's a wizard-princess turned warrior that really wants to catch the attention/affection of Messmer. Thus she wears armour that declares her as Knight, Noble, and Woman.

[nanowrimo]

Beyond the Word Count: A Book Editor's Guide to Writing a First Draft

Every year, we’re lucky to have great sponsors for our nonprofit events. First Draft Pro, a 2023 NaNoWriMo sponsor, is a beautifully designed writing app for fiction writers. Today, they've partnered with Kelly Norwood-Young, former book editor for Pan Macmillan and Penguin Random House, to bring you some pro tips on writing your first draft:

In my career as a book editor, I’ve reviewed hundreds of manuscripts. I've seen the joy of authors creating compelling tales, but also how disheartening it can be to rewrite a disjointed story. I’m here to give you some strategies to address common pitfalls so that you not only reach your NaNoWriMo goal, but also lay the groundwork for a manuscript that truly deserves to be called a gripping novel.

1. Have a plan.

Even if you’re more of a ‘pantser’ than a ‘planner’, it's really helpful to have an outline. I have two favourite approaches for this: the structure-first approach, and what I call the ‘Phoebe Waller-Bridge approach’.  

The structure-first approach

There are a lot of narrative frameworks for story structure, but the most foundational in Western fiction is the three-act structure. Here’s a handy guide that breaks each of the classical three acts into a day-by-day guide to NaNoWriMo: 

8-day guide to Act 1

14-day guide to Act 2

8-day guide to Act 3

The Phoebe Waller-Bridge approach

I love this quote from Phoebe Waller-Bridge: ‘I’ve never thought structure first. I’ve always thought material first, jokes first, character first ... But knowing the end really helps. Then you just go as far away from the end emotionally as you possibly can.’  

Sketch out your major story arcs, your character’s desires and conflicts, and the world they inhabit. The more you know your story's world and inhabitants, the less you'll stray into scenes that lack purpose or create plot and character inconsistencies. 

2. Keep the story moving.

Each word needs to propel your story forward. Superfluous details or tangents that don’t serve the narrative stall the momentum you’re trying to generate for your reader. 

There’s a trick you can use to move your story forward, called the question of reversibility. Ask yourself: How difficult would it be for my character to reverse their decision? The harder it would be for them to turn back, the more you’ve moved the plot forward. 

3. Plant clues carefully.

Plant important elements early and make sure every element, however subtle, serves a purpose (i.e. Chekhov’s Gun). 

Be sure to set up necessary components for your climax so that you can steer clear of Deus ex Machina (having that strong outline will help you here), and avoid red herrings unless they serve a clear, meaningful purpose (e.g. you’re writing a mystery and your readers expect some false leads). Misleading your readers without a payoff can erode their trust.

4. Write for the reader, not yourself.

‘There is only one thing you write for yourself, and that is a shopping list,’ insists Umberto Eco in On Literature. Even if writing, for you, is a therapeutic outlet, a form of self-expression, or a way to leave a legacy, you’re still writing to say something to someone else. Your story simply won’t be as strong if you forget your reader’s perspective. 

5. Keep daily editorial notes for your future self.

While editing should wait until at least December, end each day with a brief reflection, noting any off-course deviations, potential inconsistencies, areas to research further, or moments of inspiration to revisit when you start editing. 

These daily notes will be invaluable during the editing process, helping you to remember insights that are no longer fresh when you come back to the manuscript later.

6. Embrace the first-draft mentality.

There’s a lot you can do to ensure that your first draft is the best it can be before the end of November—but just as important is to understand that all first drafts have flaws.

As a book editor, I've witnessed manuscripts transform, sometimes unrecognizably, from their first drafts. Embrace the uncertainty and creative detours—because it's from this beautiful chaos that your story will find its true voice. 

Kelly Norwood-Young is a seasoned book editor and proofreader with comprehensive experience across various facets of manuscript editing. Her background includes roles at Pan Macmillan and Penguin Books, extending into a successful freelance career working with award-winning authors. Kelly's work, known for its precision and sensitivity to the author's voice, has been integral to the success of both new and established writers globally.

Try out First Draft Pro: All NaNoWriMo participants can use the discount code NANOWRIMO2023 for 20% off a premium subscription to First Draft Pro! Offer expires January 31, 2024.

[theaudientvoid]

A while back, there was a post going around about how, in generational sequels, where the protagonists of one installment are the children of the protagonists of the previous installment, it always seems like the first question the writers ask is "how can we have the previous protagonists definitively fail as parents?"

Now, there are a couple reasons why this is, but one of the biggest ones is that this particular trope seems to be most common in stories in which the protagonists are children. And in any such story, one of the first questions that the writers need to answer is: "Why don't the adults just resolve plot? Why do the children have to be the ones to do it?" Obviously, the out of universe answer is because the story isn't about them, but that doesn't absolve you from having to come up with an in universe answer as well.

One particularly lazy answer is that the adults just suck. They're neglectful or incompetent, and that's why the children are the ones who have to save the world, or whatever. Another is just pure deus ex machina: the prophesy says that the kid is the chosen one, so they have to be the one to do it. There are less lazy solutions, but these generally require more work on the writers part to pull off believably. Whatever the reason, some kind of Watsonian explanation needs to be offered for why the adults are prevented from engaging with the plot.

This gets particularly tricky when dealing with generational spin offs. Because we've already established that the adults in the situation are protagonists. We've seen them do it before, why can't they do it again? In these situations, it's very tempting to fall back on the lazy solutions: "they just suck", etc.

One example given in the original post of a story that avoided these pitfalls was the Lord of the Rings. Here, there are to things to keep in mind. One: neither Bilbo nor Frodo was a child. Two: there's a very good reason why Bilbo couldn't have carried the Ring to Mount Doom: he's retired. The first chapter was literally his retirement party.

[olderthannetfic]

Anon with the beta issues: I'd say be clearer what you want, but also, you don't HAVE to use betas and it's also okay to reject people who aren't very good at it. One of the reasons I don't use them except in terms of having people I know well look over specific things is because I have friends who've done exchanges that require and assign betas and routinely have the problem of being better editors than them. One of them is routinely not understanding "mistakes" done for stylistic reasons, but another one I've seen in those cases is insisting that something is a "rule" that actually isn't? And might not even be, per se, good writing. I always get the sense some of these people remember some weird suggestion a not-so-great English teacher gave them once in middle or high school and took it too well to heart. Or even something that maybe wasn't a bad suggestion to help through some common writer pitfalls in say, essays in 9th grade, but aren't something you should take with you to every single thing you write forever. (I think about this this way because I remember I had this crappy 7th grade English teacher who was super strict above all else with this rule about "no two sentences in the same paragraph must start with the same word." I was already enough of a writer by 7th grade to know that wasn't a universal writing rule, and to feel frustrated that I was hemmed in by that when sometimes there was literally no other way to communicate what I was saying without getting really clunky. I varied sentences a lot; I didn't really think that I should lose some massive number of points just because two sentences in the same paragraph that were not adjacent started with some common word like "I" or "The." But in retrospect, I can kinda see why a middle school teacher might insist on something like that, if she's seeing a longstanding issue with repetitive, unadventurous phrasings. The issue was just that she was as strict as she was about it. Anyway, that's naturally what arises to me when I see some beta insisting on some "rule" that I've never heard of as like, an officially published author who has worked with professional editors and copyeditors.) I saw a post along the lines that said that like "get a beta who can actually write equivalent or better than you, and don't be afraid to turn down offers by people you know don't fit that" is good starter advice, and I think that's the most common pitfall other than like, "either beta is not comfortable giving criticism or writer is not comfortable receiving criticism"

--

Yuuuup

[spirit-meets-the-b0ne]

House of the Dragon was built to fail

Which the greatest shame of that is, I truly believe they got an incredible cast of talented actors, it's distressing to see them largely wasted. I've been an HBO fan (in a Stockholm kind of way) for the better part of two decades and even some of their usual pitfalls were accelerated here. While it's easy to just blame Ryan (5 spits for an enemy Condall) it still feels like there's more than just writing or directing so this post won't focus as much on the characterization follies but more on the story's infrastructure. While budgetary concerns with a show like this are obvious considering the dragons cost a great deal of time and money it is odd to me that this is a series rather than a mini-series. By that I mean, HBO for most of their big productions had seasons ranging from 10-15 episodes (Sopranos S1 13 episodes, True Blood S1 12 episodes, The Wire S1 13 episodes, etc) so this is exceptionally short of a season for House of the Dragon. Game of Thrones original run was largely a 10 episode format until the later seasons which were also notably shit.

This structure was never designed to give the characters or an audience time to breathe. While this is something that is continually brought up across the cinema/film community these days it seems especially important here. It also seems very easy for an audience to decide against investing time and energy into a series that only holds you for 8 weeks and then takes another 2-3 years of production. As most of the audience knows, it isn't like there is a shortage of materials for the show to incorporate. It's an active choice to not dive more into the lives and circumstances of these character and their relationships. Now, I'm not expecting Lost 2.0 where every character will get an episodic focal point and backstory. Still, you have plenty of non-dragon riding characters whom you could spend time with that don't require maxing out your VFX budget for. Because as of right now from the posts I've been seeing it's clear that most of the general audience at this point is more invested in the dragons than any human character in the show save for some Stans. I can't say I blame them. Most every character at this point is barely tolerable or straight up deeply unlikeable. That's a failure of the writers and directors explicitly. I think the actors are genuinely doing the best they could with the material they're given.

It's frustrating because while I was expecting this show to disappoint (both because of GoT's outcome and HBO's late game losing streak shout out to True Blood for getting so bad I never watched the final episodes) this production is hitting that wall way sooner than expected. If there was another 2-4 episodes to actually develop the characters and their relationships (even with piss poor writing) it might have helped tremendously but this structure is going to leave an audience wanting more and not in a good way. If there is a season 3 I can't imagine in 2 years that a lot of the current viewership would return. So even the "fix it" episode rewrites fans make don't seem like enough, to me you genuinely need more material, more for an audience to invest in or feel a part of. If this season was even 10 episodes there would have been so much room for improvement. The Last of Us was able to deliver a satisfying plot and character arcs with 9 episodes and there's a huge difference with the way that was received by audiences vs. HotD. The obvious difference is the amount of time they needed to tell that story vs. the amount of time you rightly needed to tell this one, which is case in point why HotD needed more time. So, while a short season can deliver satisfaction in some cases, I don’t believe as a rule it should all be common place to condense stories and characters. Especially considering HotD's compression is coming largely at the expense of the women in the show (Rhaena, Jeyne Arryn, Helaena, Nettles, Rhaenrya and Alicent's respective character assassination, etc). That's to say even if these character plots deviate from the canon they have the room to grow and develop a character completely to an audience. If you're going to change a character from the source material at least make them a well-developed different person.