The Kilted Writer

I participate in a number of online forums about writing. Most of the time, I find good discussion about the craft and the nuances that drive writing from "good" to "great." Too often, however, I find interjections into the conversations that make me ask the question, "Are you serious ?" Sometimes, I actually have to back away from the computer (or even leave the room) to keep from posting a response I would ultimately regret. Here are just a few examples I'd like to bring to light. PLEASE, do not be these people. (Note: slight paraphrasing has been done to help hide the identities of the guilty parties). 1. The "live editor." This person says, " When you're publishing an ebook, you can submit updated content after each rewrite...I return to the book often, updating the file after each rewrite; but let at least a few weeks or months pass between each edit. " Yes, that is (slightly paraphrased) an actual comment from an act

I've been active on a number of forums for writers lately. Inevitably, the extremely divisive topic of editing comes up. You have the one side that says, "I don't need an editor, I can edit my own work." On the other hand, you have those who point out that one of the biggest problems in indie publishing is the (not necessarily unfounded) reputation it has for poor quality. Part of the problem in the discussion comes down to definitions. Here's what I mean: Author : I don't need an editor. I have five degrees related to English grammar. I have absolutely zero errors in my manuscript. I can edit my own work. Reader : You're right. I didn't find any errors in grammar or usage, but your character arc is very weak and you have a few plot holes. You still need an editor. Author : But you said my manuscript was perfect! Besides, what's a "character ark?" You see, there are at least four different kinds of editing. Many writers I've e

I have been following several discussions on LinkedIn about the market for short-form fiction for a couple of weeks. It is amazing to me how short-sighted and ignorant of history some people are. Several people seemed to believe that short stories have never been a viable outlet for writers or that writers who are "serious" about their craft would never debase themselves so much by writing short fiction. (I've paraphrased and may have added some embellishment). One commenter in a discussion went so far as to say you could not be a good short story writer if you wrote long-form and that short story writers could never write a decent novel. (Um, ever hear of Stephen King, John Updike, F. Scott Fitzgerald, John Steinbeck, Isaac Asimov, William Faulkner, etc...) As a result of all this conversation, I decided to give you my take on what's happening in the short story market and why. I'm no business insider, but I believe a little history goes a long way to understan

The Giver , by Lois Lowry, contains a lot of mind, body, and spirit symbolism on a variety of levels. First is Jonas and his two friends, Asher and Fiona. Jonas is the mind, Asher the body, and Fiona the spirit. Second is Jonas's family. His father is the spirit, his mother is the mind, and the children in the household collectively make up a body character. When examined individually, however, Jonas is the mind, Lily (his sister) is the spirit, and Gabriel (the child from the nursery they are nurturing during the night) is the body. I just glossed over this without giving any real reasons as to why this is true because I want to get into a slightly different topic. In my workshops, I often talk about occupations and their relation to the mind, body, and spirit symbolism. The Giver is a great example of the use of occupations to help strengthen your character symbolism. Spirit characters have a lot of compassion and tend to put their "cause" ahead of themselves. In

The world in the book The Giver , by Lois Lowry, is revealed to the reader slowly, starting with the main character, Jonas, but then building outward from his limited perception into a broader and more encompassing view. In the opening scene, Jonas sees an aircraft fly over, and it puzzles him. He readily obeys the command from the speakers spread throughout the community to go inside. Through this incident, we learn that air travel is rare in this world and that bicycles are the primary mode of transportation for the people. We also begin to see the emphasis on precision of language, especially with the word "release." We learn that "release" is a very serious matter and not something to ever be used lightly or jokingly. Next, Lowry introduces Asher, Jonas's best friend. Through this new character, we learn a little about how schools operate in the community, and we get a clearer idea about the precision of language in the society. Finally, we see one way e

With the trailers for the new film version of Lois Lowry's The Giver showing up more and more, I thought I would start a series of posts looking at the book's introduction and characters. I must admit I have never read The Giver , but I'm correcting that error as I prepare these posts. The first thing I noticed as I was listening (I do better with audio due to some reading problems) to the book was the use of the "Show; Don't Tell" principle. Jonas lives in a dystopian society that is described very well through scenes in the book's introduction. First, we see a jet flying over the community. An announcement forces people inside, leaving their bicycles lying where they were dropped. From this, we know this is a very disciplined society that is monitored by some unseen group, and this group can communicate to everyone at any time. We also learn the severity of being "released." Lowry could have simply defined the word for us, but Jonas's