Writing 101: Page Critique - Vintagegirl

Every Thursday the Writing 101 crew, Michael and Lauren, will critique a page from a novel. If you'd like your page critiqued, please fill out the Writing 101: Page Critique Form. We have submissions queued up but are still posting just one page a week, so if you've submitted but haven't seen your page yet, don't panic! ;) Stay tuned. Also, you can read the previous submission.

First we present the page without comment:

Author: vintagegirl
Title: Fitz
Genre: Contemporary YA
1st Page (293 words) 

After her death, it snowed for the first time in years. 
It was the first September morning and the sun had hidden behind thick layers of mist and wet snow. Alex Emerson watched it from his bed as he tried to rid his head of thoughts and feelings. It was easy enough not to think, but much harder to get rid of the void that filled his stomach. Trying to concentrate on the falling flakes and figuring out why they were white didn’t help, either. 

Nothing helped. Everything reminded him of her. 

Her name had been Beth. Beth Farlow. Mrs. Farlow, whom he had never really known, had come round their house a day after it had happened. Her eyes had been bloodshot cracks in her face when she asked him why her daughter had to die at seventeen. Because she had, for one second, been careless in crossing the railroad tracks. He hadn’t told her that a train had hit Beth Farlow because she had thrown herself in front of it. Because she had thought that seventeen was seventeen years too many to live. 

He had been in his bed ever since it happened three days ago. His mother had gone through his room, taking away all sharp objects and things that could be turned into sharp objects. So that his room was a safe haven where he couldn’t hurt himself. So that he was stuck inside his own isolated hell, feeling nothing and unable to get rid of the constant need to do what Beth did.
He hadn’t gone to school. He intended not to until everyone had forgotten about Beth and gone back to their stupid lives. Or at least until they had gotten the ridiculous memorial service over with.

What say you, readers of Paper Hangover? Did this first page intrigue you enough to read on? Please keep your criticisms constructive. Always be polite and considerate of the writer. 

Michael's and Lauren's line by line edits and then our overall comments after the jump.

The Goldilocks Zone

Today's post is about balancing description in your narrative. You don’t want too much description, or not enough description. You want to find that infamous Goldilocks Zone where the amount of description is just right.

Incorporate All the Senses

You've probably heard this one a gazillion times. That's because it works. 

Using any other sense besides sight makes a huge difference in narrative because sight is the sense most of us rely on most frequently. It's useful and necessary, but kinda boring.

The addition of sound, touch, smell and taste enhances the reader experience because those senses are used less frequently, making them stand out more.

Try to include as many senses as you can, but only the ones most important to the thing you are describing. It isn't necessary to use all the senses in every given scene.

How do you know which senses are most important? See the next item directly below.

Zoom In On Unique/Contrasting Details

• A mouse the size of an elephant
• An elephant the size of a mouse
• A wagon shaped like a rocket
• A cave that smells like laundry detergent
• Roses that smell sour
• A car wreck that sounded like guitar strings snapping
• An ice cube that burns
• Salty ice cream

Not all of your descriptions will be as contrasting as those examples, but the key is to find something so specific about the thing you’re describing that the image implants into the readers head and they begin to experience the story first-hand.

Pick one or two things that stand out in your setting or characters and describe that in great detail. (See, “Description Length”)

Filter Description Through the POV Character

When the POV character directly conveys how they feel about the sight/smell/sound/etc. they are experiencing, it makes the description more entertaining for the reader. Simple as that.

People read encyclopedias when they want a list of facts. People read stories because they want to become immersed in a world outside of their own.

Revise that info dump until it feels like something the POV character would actually think about or say in that moment. Show their personality. Express who they are on the surface and at their core. It will bring your story to life.

Skip the Mundane

We live in an age where the world is literally at our fingertips. There are some things that just don’t require much explaining in fiction. Some things are universal enough that you can mention them without going into a lot of detail about it.

You always need to set the scene, and some description is always required, but a hospital is a hospital, a church is a church, and a school is a school no matter where you go.

Of course, not all hospitals, churches or schools look exactly the same as one another. They come in all different sizes and depending on where you are in the world, they will vary in numerous other ways. Those will be the unique details you pick out to describe your specific setting.

Beyond that, readers will imagine the kind of setting that’s most familiar to them. When we read a story set inside a school for instance, we tend to imagine the school we used to attend or the school we send our children to. We imagine the hospital where we go to see our personal physician, and the church we were baptized in, etc.

Only if there is something unique about the setting as described in the story we’re reading do we begin to see a different image in our minds.

For instance, the school may be described in the story as being held in a castle with lots of secret passageways, the professors are wizards, and ghosts frequently roam the halls. (See: “Zoom In On Unique/Contrasting Details.” Also, Harry Potter.)

Description Length

It’s not the size of the boat. It’s the motion in the ocean.

Sometimes you’ll need a paragraph or more to describe something. Other times you’ll need just a sentence or two. Fantasy writers, for instance, usually need to include more description than thriller writers because of the various new concepts that are introduced in a fantastical setting.

The Goldilocks Zone is what you make it. Everyone has their own tolerance level when it comes to description. Some readers require more description than other readers do. Each individual reader will bring his or her own preferences to your story, and there’s no way to anticipate that.

Utilizing the techniques above have helped me stay within a general safe zone.

Writing 101: Some Rules to Break

Here at Paper Hangover we're all about flagrant disregard for rules. Hey, this is a blog for YA fiction, after all, and if anyone excels at breaking rules, it's fictional teens! In keeping with Michael's post a few weeks back on five phrases that make his blood boil, I'm breaking down a few writing "rules" that I think are nonsense. Or at least, nonsense in the way they are often touted. Broken clocks, etc.


Don't Use Adverbs

Pfft. I'm immediately skeptical of any claim that advises you to eliminate an entire part of speech. Adverbs exist for a reason.

Some writers do have a problem with sloppy or redundant use of adverbs. What I mean is, a phrase like "she whispered quietly" is a well, duh moment for a reader. And some words like very, pretty, really, etc. can have their meaning diluted when used excessively.

But adverbs that actually do their job--that is, modify the verb--I propose should be used as often as necessary. I once saw someone on a writing forum say that instead of saying "she said quietly" one should just say "she whispered," but another user rightly pointed out that whispering and speaking quietly are not the same thing. Using a mix of adverbs along with a variety of strong verbs adds nuance to your writing.

I believe you should turn a critical eye on all your words when you're evaluating your work. What good is it to cut out innocent adverbs while you let your nouns, verbs, adjectives, and prepositions run wild?

English has a vocabulary of around half a million words. USE THEM!


Don't Use Names in Dialogue

I've seen a number of articles saying you should never have your characters address each other by name, because people in real life don't talk that way. This one makes me scratch my head because... um... actually, people in real life do talk that way. Names show up in IRL dialogue for a variety of reasons:

Greetings! "How's it going, Jess?"

Emphasis! "Stop it, Stephanie. I mean it."

Interjection! "Oh my god, Ralph, that's disgusting!"

Discriminating one person from another! "Not you, Dan."

And any number of other scenarios. Whether you should use names depends on context, your characters' speaking habits, and your own style. Go with what works best for the scene. If it doesn't sound unnatural and doesn't slow down the reader, there's no reason to cut it.


Don't Wait for Inspiration, Just Write

I'm sure this one works for some people who have motivation issues. It doesn't work for me. The things I write when I'm not feeling inspired are crap. If you're a binge writer, take heart, because there are plenty more of us in the world!

What I would suggest as an alternative to this rule is (a) learn what inspires you and (b) know when you've hit a dead end. There's a difference between waiting for a perfectly formed novel to drop into your imagination, and only starting to write when you've got an idea that excites you.

As I said, though, your mileage may vary. If you get good results from forcing your fingers to the keys every day, by all means, don't quit!


Read Five Hundred Gazillion Books a Year

I'm not going to dispute the idea that in order to be a good writer, you must also read a lot. But "a lot" is relative. Book tallies can look a lot like pissing contests. Don't feel discouraged if you're a slow reader and aren't one of those people who can fly through multiple books a week. Read at a pace that's comfortable and enjoyable. Read enough to inspire yourself, refine your craft, and stay abreast of your genre. Don't read just to rack up numbers.

That's all I have at the moment! What are your favorite writing rules to break?

Flawed Perfection

There is no such thing as a perfectly written story. Even the greatest stories have flaws. Writers and publishers have to be okay with a certain level of flaws in the stories they produce.

Some readers and reviewers will gripe about everything that went wrong within a particular book, while others will rave about everything that went right with that same story. There’s a tolerance level for everything and it’s different for each person.

Or frog.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deems dirt, hair, and non-invasive insects "natural contaminants" and are indeed allowed and present in your food.

The “Food Defect Action Levels” is a booklet published by the FDA that details what they say are natural or unavoidable defects in foods that present no health hazards for humans.

According to the FDA they are needed " ... because it is economically impractical to grow, harvest, or process raw products that are totally free of non-hazardous, naturally occurring, unavoidable defects."

And so it is when writing a book as well. It is impractical to write, edit, proofread, beta, or critique a novel that will be completely free of grammar issues, structural missteps, story inconsistencies, or any unavoidable oversight.

This is why you can pluck a random novel off a shelf and find some kind of problem with it, large or small. And to top it off, every story just isn’t for every reader no matter how clean the manuscript comes out after so many editing passes.

This is not to say that an author shouldn't apply that elbow-grease and try to scrub her story free of dirt and grime. It is only to say that the greatest stories shine despite their flaws. Natural errors in a story present no enjoyment hazard to the right reader. To these readers, there may not be a flaw at all.

As an author, the key is to make book’s flaws invisible by telling a great story. This is the one and only rule.

So, keep serving up your fly soup.





What is your ”Story Defect Action Level”? Do a certain number of story issues cause you to close a book? What’s your favorite story that you consider flawed yet oh, so perfect?

Writing 101: The Story Circle

A while ago, Dan Harmon (creator and head writer of Community) wrote a series of posts on his website’s forum breaking down story structure in a hilarious concise fashion. His methods were written with television in mind, but these story techniques are universal for any writer and any medium. They are based on Joseph Campbell’s The Hero’s Journey, but simplified for modern storytelling. The way he breaks it down has helped me re-evaluate my own work. It’s amazingly simple.

First, you begin by drawing a circle. Divide it in half vertically, and then divide the circle again horizontally. Starting from the 12 o’clock position and going clockwise, number the 4 points where the lines cross the circle: 1, 3, 5 and 7. Next, number the quarter-sections themselves 2, 4, 6 and 8.

(The images from Dan’s posts were missing so I constructed my own visual representation of the Story Circle):

Download this if you want. Print it out. Doodle all over it.

 

Dan says:

That horizontal line dividing the circle is the first one you want to think about when creating a story. What's above it and what's below it?

Robocop: Above the line, cop. Below the line, Robocop.

Die Hard: Above the line, bad marriage. Below the line, terrorist attack.

Citizen Kane: Above the line, news reel. Below the line, truth.

MacBeth: Above the line, hero. Below the line, villain.

Star Wars: Above the line, farm boy. Below the line, adventurer.

The Incredible Talking Dog: Above the line, dog can't talk...

Back to the Future: 1985 / 1955

etc. etc.

1. You (a character is in a zone of comfort)

Dan says:

ESTABLISH A PROTAGONIST... Who are we? A squirrel? The sun? A red blood cell? America?

2. Need (but they want something)

Dan says:

SOMETHING AIN'T QUITE RIGHT… Something is wrong, the world is out of balance. This is the reason why a story is going to take place. The "you" from (1) is an alcoholic. There's a dead body on the floor. A motorcycle gang rolls into town.

3. Go (they enter an unfamiliar situation)

Dan says:

CROSSING THE THRESHOLD… For (1) and (2), the "you" was in a certain situation, and now that situation changes. A hiker heads into the woods. Pearl Harbor's been bombed. A mafia boss enters therapy.

4. Search (adapt to it)

Dan says:

THE ROAD OF TRIALS… Adapting, experimenting, getting shit together, being broken down. A detective questions suspects. A cowboy gathers his posse. A cheerleader takes a nerd shopping.

5. Find (find what they wanted)

Dan says:

MEETING WITH THE GODDESS… Whether it was the direct, conscious goal or not, the "need" from (2) is fulfilled. We found the princess. The suspect gives the location of the meth lab. A nerd achieves popularity.

6. Take (pay its price)

Dan says:

MEET YOUR MAKER… The hardest part (both for the characters and for anyone trying to describe it). On one hand, the price of the journey. The shark eats the boat. Jesus is crucified. The nice old man has a stroke. On the other hand, a goal achieved that we never even knew we had. The shark now has an oxygen tank in his mouth. Jesus is dead- oh, I get it, flesh doesn't matter. The nice old man had a stroke, but before he died, he wanted you to take this belt buckle. Now go win that rodeo.

7. Return (and go back to where they started)

Dan says:

BRINGING IT HOME… It's not a journey if you never come back. The car chase. The big rescue. Coming home to your girlfriend with a rose. Leaping off the roof as the skyscraper explodes.

8. Change (now capable of change)

Dan says:

MASTER OF BOTH WORLDS… The "you" from (1) is in charge of their situation again, but has now become a situation-changer. Life will never be the same. The Death Star is blown up. The couple is in love. Dr. Bloom's Time Belt is completed. Lorraine Bracco heads into the jungle with Sean Connery to "find some of those ants."

Dan Harmon goes on to explain:

… the REAL structure of any good story is simply circular - a descent into the unknown and eventual return - and that any specific descriptions of that process are specific to you and your story.

It's not that stories have to follow this structure, it's that, without some semblance of this structure, it's not recognizable as a story.

There are some exceptions to everything, but that's called style, not structure.

When I talk about "story structure" I'm talking about something very scientific, like "geometry." Your story could have "perfect" structure, in that it hits all the resonant points craved by the audience mind, but that won't make it a perfect piece of entertainment. Example:

Once upon a time, there was a thirsty man on a couch. He got up off the couch, went to his kitchen, searched through his refrigerator, found a soda, drank it, and returned to his couch, thirst quenched.

That was "perfect story structure." On the other hand, the story sucked.

Here's a converse example:

Once upon a time, a car exploded. A Navy Seal killed a werewolf. Two beautiful naked women had sex with each other, then a robot shot the moon with a Jesus-powered laser. The world became overpopulated by zombies. The End.

Lot of exciting, creative stuff happening, but very little structure. Again, boo, but the lesbian scene did give me a boner. What do you want? You want both. You want to be cool, but you're going to be cooler if the structure is there. Cool stuff with no structure is like that perfect scene you recorded when you left the lens cap on. "Guess you had to be there." Show me an army of zombies and I might say "cool zombies," but I'm not going to "be there."

 

Links to the full posts. All are well worth a read.

Dan Harmon - StoryStructure 101: Super Basic Shit

Dan Harmon - StoryStructure 102: Pure, Boring Theory

Dan Harmon - StoryStructure 103: Let's Simplify Before Moving on

Dan Harmon - StoryStructure 104: The Juicy Details, part 1

Dan Harmon - StoryStructure 104: The Juicy Details, part 2

5 Phrases That Boil My Blood

The following are phrases that make my blood boil.


Write what you know

This is a darling we should all kill on sight. This phrase makes my blood boil for a reason you might not expect. The reason I strongly dislike this phrase is because of it's sheer pointlessness. Every writer writes what they know. It is literally impossible to write what you don't know. Mind. Blown. You just got raptured. Deal with it.


Rules of Writing

Not really a phrase that people say, but I'm a rebel. I just changed the rules on you.

For all the so called "rules" that we make such a hoopla about, they really don't exist. They're imaginary. They're all made up. They're unicorns. The truth is, we all pretend as if these things are real tangible objects. Yes, they work when implemented--Sometimes. Most of the time. If you're lucky. The rules are effective within the construct we have collectively built. Keywords: we. built.

Rules are our creation. These rules were not bestowed upon Earth before we arrived. We all just agree that things should be a certain way so it doesn't get confusing, which is great. Confusion is bad. But anything man made can be changed, manipulated, rearranged, reimagined, reconstructed, remade. We just don't bother to do it because it's really really hard work. And we human beings love our consistency.

Just to clarify: I'm not advocating that we should in any way disregard the rules of writing. Not at all. I would never suggest any writer to not follow any of the guidelines that would only improve their craft and the experience for the reader, especially if you wish to get published. However, as an artist, once we realize that all of it is an illusion, we free ourselves from the Matrix. And sometimes it's healthy to give yourself that room to experiment. Learn kung fu.

Whether or not you will end up with publishable work is another conversation, which is constantly bandied about all over the Internets, so much so that there's no need for me to regurgitate it here.

"You can not put a grade on true art." -- Lil' B

Never [insert thing you should never do]

Anytime you encounter a phrase with the word "never" in it, it's always wrong. (Unless it's something like: never wander into a Bear's home and use their furniture or eat their food. But we're taking about writing.) Never is nearly forever. That's a really long time to exclude something that is already a part of our ever evolving language.

Maybe the phrase should say: You could try this some other time, but not right now.


Only if you're a genius

It's often said around writing blogs [who?] that one shouldn't write a particular way unless you're a genius. Usually someone will say, "[Genius author] could get away with writing this way because they are a genius."

Well, I guess I have to become a genius then or else I'm screwed because everything has already been done before...by geniuses.

Example from Elmore Leonard's Ten rules for writing fiction:

9. Don't go into great detail describing places and things, unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language.

Why does Margaret Atwood get to have all the fun? No, I don't think Mr. Leonard was actually saying that only Margaret Atwood is capable of writing those kind of scenes. Nor was he saying that she was the only one that should write them. He was complimenting a fellow great author. But the crazy old Internets have taken this phrase to mean that only geniuses should attempt the crazy, good stuff because only geniuses can pull off the crazy, good stuff. [citation needed] And new writers get lost in the sauce, wondering whatever shall they do?

The interesting thing about this phrase is that people outside of the genius' head tend to recognize the person as a genius more so than the actual genius identifies his of herself as a genius.

Following me? Just like insane people think they're sane. Geniuses think everyone thinks the way they do until we make them aware of how primitive we all are in comparison.

Let me put it another way. Einstein wasn't going around saying, "Hey numskull. I'm a genius. Listen to everything I have to say." He simply spoke his mind, honestly and people listened to him because they recognized the genius in him.

Drawing circles like a boss!

Maybe Einstein is a bad example because he's like a super genius. (And I'm no historian. So my Einstein facts will be at least 1% inaccurate. Maybe more.)

Let's take an author you admire. Think of your favorite author, the one you think of as a genius. You love everything they do. More than likely he or she doesn't think of themselves as a genius. They simply write what they're driven to write, what they love, the story they can't not write. Your genius author probably even has doubts about their work just like we do. We're all just people, man.

I could be wrong, but I don't think that authors, like Hemingway for instance, knew he would be the great almighty Hemingway before he became the great almighty Hemingway. That would take some serious clairvoyance.

If you are a genius, you won't know it unless you hang around idiots who know a lot less than you or when people declare you a genius because you've accomplished something no one else has, just like your favorite author. But the odds are you aren't a genius. The good news is you don't have to be. Ever heard of Snooki? (That could be bad news depending on how you look at it.)


Readers know what they want

This phrase is incomplete. In it's entirety it should read: Readers know what they want only when they come across it--after the fact, and not in advance of the existence of said material.

Before Harry Potter existed, no reader was shouting, "Why hasn't anybody written Harry Potter yet?  Don't they know I want to read it? The next new author should write Harry Potter. They'll make a billion dollars."

Sounds silly, right? This is the exact reason why you can't write explicitly for readers. They don't know what they want. Readers are great at finding what appeals to them from existing material. That's it.

You have an amazing book idea right now, something I could never think of. I don't know that I want to read it yet because from my perspective, whatever it is, it doesn't exist.

Write with readers in mind, but not for them. Be considerate of your potential readers, but you can't really cater to them because authors don't know exactly what readers want either. If we did, we'd all be instant bestsellers.

There's a middle ground between writing what you love and making that reader-friendly. Find that balance. When you do, let me know where you found it. I need some of that mojo.


Disclaimer: Those tiny wikipedia links [who?]  & [citation needed] were meant as a joke. I was poking fun at my own weasel words and unverified claims. I hope you got the joke and didn't think I copied and pasted the post from some wiki article or something.