Wednesday Wonderings - Blog Excerpts To Published Material

Before I plunge into today's question, there are a few housekeeping items I need to mention. If you haven't stopped by The Literary Lab in the last couple of days, you need to. Scott and Davin have been walking through their writing processes, and it is very interesting reading (particularly for those of us trying to improve and refine our own processes). If Lady Glamis can share her ideas on the subject (hint hint), it'll be an awesome finish to the topic.

My friend (at least I hope I'm still a friend) Rebecca Woodhead is trying to win the literary category in the Shorty Awards and she could use your vote. She already won Ms. Twitter UK, but this would be an even great accomplishment on top of that. I have been woefully remiss in mentioning her progress, so I don't blame her if she wants to thump me on the head with an oversized fountain pen. She is doing awesome, but she could really use your votes. Make me proud all you wonderful followers and vote her to the top.

And last (but not least), Jody Hedlund - newly agented and on her way to publication - has been providing us a glimpse into her journey as she wades through the process. I have found it fascinating, and I think you will too.

Now on to business.

Yesterday I joined the Lighthouse Writer's Workshop as a member so that I can take a course on writing short stories. I have decided that this is a great place to begin my creative writing education.

This morning I began thinking about short stories and what I would bring to this class. I have started quite a few meanderings here on my blog, many of which I can see expanding into a full-fledged story. As I was thinking about these, I experienced a horrific moment. What if I am not allowed (or not encouraged) to use the writings I have posted here?

What I am concerned about is whether posting a writing on blogger makes it less likely that I could ever publish that story in a real magazine/anthology/publication. I'm not concerned that anyone else owns the rights to the story, since I write everything here myself. I am more concerned though, that someone else would not want to publish it in their media since a rough draft/previous version exists out here on my blog. I actually enjoy using this medium as a way to test out story ideas, work my way through them. But am I limiting myself by doing so?

If anyone can shed light on this, I'd really appreciate it. While I'd hate to stop posting my creative thoughts here, I would really hate to miss the opportunity to take those writings and actually get them published as a completed story later in the future.

Poor Research Makes Me Want To Say Goodbye

I am currently in the middle of reading Dan Brown's book The Lost Symol, and I ran into something that has completely changed my mind about him as an author. I don't think I will ever buy another book by the man.

First off, I know all about the talk, the web sites, the controversy over his books. I once ran into a web link that listed all the things he has supposedly gotten wrong in previous books. But I tried to avoid listening to the Internet hype and enjoy his books. Unfortunately, his latest mistake is one I cannot ignore.

The following excerpt (which I will show you) is a scene where this "computer expert" is trying to find out where the physical location of a document (on the web) is based on it's IP address. An IP address (for the uninitiated) is basically the address of a resource, be it a web page, a computer, a modem, etc. That's a simplification, but hopefully you get the idea. This person has been described as being top notch, a leading expert in her field. Here's what Mr. Brown writes:


Strangely, the file's location was not displaying as a traditional Web address but rather as a numeric Internet Protocol address. "I can't unmask the IP," Trish said. "The domain name's not coming up. Hold on." She pulled up her terminal window. "I'll run a traceroute."


Okay, stop there. Traceroute IS an actual command that can be run on a computer. Mr. Brown did enough research to find that much out. The next section though (a few paragraphs ahead) is where the problem lies.


What the hell? Her trace had stopped before reaching the document's server. Her ping, for some reason, had hit a network device that swallowed it rather than bouncing it back. "It looks like my traceroute got blocked," Trish said. Is that even possible?


This last statement is where the problem lies. You see, while traceroute is a valid computer command, it's a very basic one. Any IT professional worth their salt at least knows about it, and 99% of them would know how to run it. And this character Trish is so computer savvy, she designed (read this as programmed) her own web search tool (which is how she found this secretive document). Wouldn't she have better tools at her disposal for discovery than a simple traceroute command?

What's worse is the fact that if you google "block traceroute", you'll find out just how easy it is to perform this task. You see, there are different ports (think portals or doorways) for every type of computer communication. Certain types of email for example, use port 25. Traceroute also uses a specific port. All you have to do is block or turn off that port (on a firewall or the web server itself), and no data will ever be allowed through. This is actually a common security practice, to turn off ports that you don't want to be used. Trish should know this, if she is as computer savvy as the author describes. She shouldn't be wondering to herself whether it's even possible to block a traceroute command.

Now, I can understand when an author makes a mistake. It happens. But in this case, Mr. Brown took the time to research computer terms enough to use a valid command in his story. But he couldn't take the time to make sure he is using it in the proper context, with believable results? He couldn't take the time to make sure his computer expert character knows what she is talking about? That's inexcusable, considering how easy it is to find this information out. There are also other ways he could have handled this, without it being so wrong. He could have generalized about the tools she was using, indicating that they were her own personally designed tools. Then when things didn't work, it would make more sense that she is completely surprised.

Maybe it bugs me so much because I am an IT professional by trade. But I think it's more than that. He is supposed to be a celebrated and experienced author, and this is a pitiful mistake that should have been corrected.

How do you feel about mistakes you find in books you read? What would it take for you to decide not to read any more of a particular author's books? And am I being way too nitpicky here?

Is This Character Secondary?

I recently finished reading Stephen King's book Under The Dome. One thing that struck me about the book was the sheer number of secondary characters. The book centers on a small town that has become surrounded by an (mostly) impenetrable dome. King takes great pains however, to talk about a huge number of the town's inhabitants. It's dizzying how many people become part of the story and have a name.

I use name as a separator because this is how I classify characters (one of the ways anyway). Let's face it; if the character doesn't even rate a name in your story, are they really that important?

For example, if I'm writing a story set in a city in current times, is there a possibility that I'll have to include a convenience store clerk? Possibly. Is this person a secondary character or someone lesser? And at what point do secondary characters become merely background description?

I bring this up because in the aforementioned tome, there are literally dozens of characters with names. There are so many in fact, that there were times when I wasn't quite sure who was who. It got me to thinking about my own writing and when an appropriate time is to name someone as opposed to merely describing them. Look at the sentences below:

Harry pushed through the door with a heavy laundry bag over one shoulder. He nodded at the owner in the corner, a disheveled man with a half finished cigarette planted between cracked lips. Looking for an available washer, Harry sighed in resignation; someday he really needed to buy one of his own. It would make Sundays much easier to deal with.

In the passage above, I merely reference the owner with only the slightest of description. He's part of the background, so to speak. Now read this alternate version:

Harry pushed through the door with a heavy laundry bag over one shoulder. He nodded at Sam in the corner. Sam must be upwards of ninety, Harry figured. Sam was the owner of this dingy place and had been for at least the last sixty years. The half finished cigarette between his cracked lips was just as dirty as the man's clothes. Looking around for an available washer, Harry sighed in resignation; someday he really needed to buy one of his own. It would make Sundays much easier to deal with.

I tried to keep excessive description out of it so that the passages are fairly similar. In the second one, I have named the character and provided a bit more detail on him. Is he still merely background or did he just get catapulted into secondary character status?

King does this with many of the characters in Under The Dome. He gives enough information to get a good idea about the character, but their usefulness if you will for furthering the story is meager at best. Is this a bad way to do things? Well, I can tell you that there were times when it made for difficult reading because I couldn't remember why a particular person was in the story (or who they were with regards to the story).

This is the point when one should question whether the character is really necessary or if they should stay minimized in the background. I heard somewhere (probably from one of you fellow writers) that if a character doesn't help move the story along, they don't belong there. I agree with that with respect to named characters. If they are prominent enough to warrant a name, they must be prominent enough for the story, right? But I do think there are times when background characters are okay too, particularly for descriptive purposes.

How do you deal with secondary characters in your writing? Do you name everyone or do you have those subtle shadows that are only mentioned in passing?

Old Habits Are Hard To Break

I've been absent from the blog/writing world for quite a few days, and I'm not too happy to admit it. As you can tell from my last post, I started playing World of Warcraft again. That in itself is not necessarily a bad thing, except for when one allows it to become a focus of all activity. When I first began this writing journey, I told myself I was going to be committed to working on it all the time. I even joined a writing challenge a few weeks ago, and I stuck with it for quite a while. But as the title says, old habits creep back in fairly easily. I fell off the proverbial wagon with a bone-jarring thump, and I've just barely managed to pull myself back up.

To keep this blog about the craft though - as opposed to just my own writing - this experience begs the question. How do we go about pruning away our old habits and developing new ones, particularly with writing in mind? Any author will tell you that writing is a hard task, and I would agree with the sentiment that writing is even harder for those of us who choose to write. We agonize over every turn of phrase, stumble while searching for the perfect word, and painfully edit our own work before sending it out into the world. It's fun and not fun, all at the same time. Entire worlds can come alive with our work, and sometimes we feel like the world we create will never be completely finished.

There are also the category of writers for whom writing is not a deeply ingrained necessity. For this group, writing is not "in the blood" but rather something we strive to do through sheer force of will. I cannot say whether writers who must write have it any easier, but I can say that choosing to write rather than needing to write is one of the most difficult tasks I've come across. So how do we as writers form new writing habits? I will share with you a few things I've learned (and continue to learn), and hopefully at least some of it will help.

Rule #1 - Write. Write some more. Write again. The point here is to not stop writing, no matter how many distractions there are.

Rule #2 - Do not edit while you write. One of the hardest things to do is to write without going over and over the words, searching for that "perfect" one.

Rule #3 - Once you've finished the story, go back and edit thoroughly. Given the massive number of possible authors in the world, you don't want to send out something thats half baked.

Rule #4 - Persistence coupled with knowledge is paramount. You want to be persistent, never giving up on finishing your writing projects. If you don't couple that with knowledge however, your writing skill will never improve. Continuing to write without improving your skills through knowledge means you are not getting better. But giving up without learning how to write better is just as bad.

Rule #5 - Find a balance in everything you do. This last one is important, particularly because we all have busy lives with many things going on. Too much of any one thing is not good. Too little of any one thing is not good either. This includes writing. It also includes everything outside of writing.

Its quite possible that we've all heard these things before. Sometimes we need to remind ourselves however, chant the rules like a mantra as we sit down at the desk. And be ready to forgive yourself if you fall off the wagon. Mistakes serve the best purpose when we learn from them.