Believable Characters, Part 13

We're so far into this discussion, I probably don't need an intro anymore. Here's the important stuff: Jeff Gerke's Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's Please Understand Me II. 

Today we're studying the ESTP, or the guy who is extroverted, sensory, thinking, and perceiving. Keirsey calls this dude THE PROMOTER. He's hands-on, action-oriented, fun yet practical, and flexible. In the same way ISTP's operate instruments and machines, the ESTP operates people, maneuvering them in the direction they need to go. 

ESTP's make up ten percent of the population, so you can put plenty of these guys in your story. He is witty and clever, bringing excitement to even mundane events. He always has tickets to the latest shows or sporting events, he knows the best restaurants (where the waiters know his name), and he has a hearty appetite for the finest things in life: wine, expensive cars, fashionable clothing. He's attentive to others and smooth in social settings. He knows exactly what words to say, when to say it, and what everybody's name is. He's so in tune with people that some mistakenly believe he has empathy. Reality is that he's really good at reading people's faces and body language. He watches people, collecting data to use for his own purpose: sell the customer. 

The Promotor is willing to do whatever it takes to achieve his goal. He's an excellent troubleshooter and negotiator (or used car salesman). He'll find what works to achieve his goals and toss out traditions or moral niceties that don't work. Usually, follow-up details get lost in the thrill of victory, so he needs someone to come in behind him and finish the job. They make great defense lawyers, industrialists, and real estate developers. Unfortunately, if their desire for excitement isn't met, they may channel their energies into antisocial activities (like con artistry).

The Promoter is rarely interested in long-term commitments, and usually family becomes a second priority. He's looking for the pay-off, the gain from their investment. If it's not apparent, he'll move on, leaving behind an ex who feels like a negotiable commodity. His kids love the lavish birthday parties and fancy new toys he's eager to bring home, but are usually less enthusiastic about being pushed into competitive sports, where winning is all that matters. The more exciting and dangerous the activity, the more the ESTP likes it: surfing, skiing, racing, rock climbing, sky diving. He's got a low tolerance for anxiety and will run from any relationship that shows signs of tension, so if you need a character in crisis, make your ESTP character marry a drill sergeant. Sparks will fly!

Some famous ESTP's include Teddy Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Mike Tyson, Jessica Alba, Lucille Ball, and Madonna. Fictional ESTP's include Sonny Corleone from The Godfather, Bart Simpson, and Mystique from the X-Men.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 12

Here we go again with this fascinating discussion of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Todays personality is ISFJ, or THE PROTECTOR, according to Keirsey. The protector is consistent, friendly, conscientious, and precise. The want to be of service and minster to others. They long to guard people against the pitfalls and perils of life and make sure everyone is secure. They find great satisfaction in caring for others, and long to be seen as dependable.

These people make up a large part of the population, about ten percent. They handle disability and neediness in others better than any other personality type, and go about their duties quietly and diligently. They don't mind being under-appreciated. They are not open and talkative except to those closest to them, and this can sometimes be seen as coldness or stiffness, when in reality they are quite warm-hearted and sympathetic. They have a strong work ethic and are wiling to work long hours, forsaking play time. Because of this, they are frequently over-worked and misunderstood. But they are humble to the core and submit to what's given them.

Famous ISFJ's are Barbara Bush, William Shatner, Jimmy Stewart, and Johnny Carson. In fiction, Melanie in Gone with the Wind, Snow White, Bianca in Taming of the Shrew, and Ophelia from Hamlet are ISFJ's. 

Excellent career choices for the ISFJ character include tech support, secretaries, bookkeepers, paralegals, nurses, and veterinarians. If you need one of these in your novel, they'll come out extremely life-like if you model them after the ISFJ.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 11

We're on Part 11 of this extraordinarily long series about creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Today, let's look at INFP, who Keirsey calls THE HEALER. These folks are curious, helpful, and values-oriented. They strive to mend divisions, restore lost unity, and establish integrity. On the outside, they're easy-going and serene. On the inside, they're going nuts trying to help everybody achieve world peace and wholeness. They see the world as an ethical, honorable place, and strive to make all that idealism come true. More often than not, they are let down and take it badly. They love fantasy, and love to please everyone at all times.

INFPs are rare, making up less than one percent of the population. Think of the princess in fairy tales, or the knight who wanders the wilderness seeking someone to save. Logic is usually optional to the INFP, who prefers impressionism, metaphor, and intuition. They may make errors with facts, but never with feelings. They make excellent mates, having a deep commitment to their vows and showing immense loyalty to their spouse. 

Famous INFP's are Princess Diana (quit laughing! Just because most INFP's are loyal to their spouses doesn't mean that one can't stray...), Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, William Shakespeare, Helen Keller, Laura Ingalls Wilder, and Julia Roberts. In fiction, Anne of Green Gables, Winnie the Pooh, and Sleeping Beauty are all INFP's.

Great career choices for INFP's are missionary, psychologist, social worker, writer, and actor. You won't find INFP's seeking employment in science and technology fields, so keep that in mind when you're creating your characters. That *would* create a ton of tension for your INFP protagonist, though...

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 10

We are deep within a discussion of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Today's personality trait is the INFJ. Keirsey calls this person THE COUNSELOR. The counselor is curious, insightful, values-oriented, and organized. They want to help people to realize their human potential. They also want to contribute to the welfare of others and take great joy in guiding people onto the correct path. They are private, sensitive people, and don't crave the limelight of leadership, but are quite content to work behind the scenes to get things done.

They can be hard to get to know, as they are reserved and don't usually share their feelings with others. They can be hurt easily. When they find someone they can trust, they open up and let their feelings flow freely. They have strong empathic abilities and are often accused of reading people's minds because they can identify feelings and motives quickly. If anyone on the planet has ESP, it's the INFJ. They are seen as poetic and sometimes even mystical. They are highly attracted to the arts. 

Famous INFJ's include Jimmy Carter, Jerry Seinfeld, Fanny Crosby, Mother Teresa, and Mahatma Ghandi. In fiction, Luke Skywalker and Mulan are both INFJ's.

Counselors make excellent recruiters, coaches, ministers, and (duh) counselors. If you need an entrepreneur or flight attendant in your novel, look elsewhere. 

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 9

I'm back with more of this riveting topic of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities, and If I don't pay attention, I'll lose where I'm at on the list. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts by now, so I don't have to repeat them yet again.

Today's personality is ENFP (extrovert, intuitive, feeling, perceptive), who Keirsey calls THE CHAMPION. The Champion is improvisational, optimistic, supportive, quick-thinking, and imaginative. To this person, nothing occurs that is without significance or profound meaning. And they don't want to miss any of it. They want to experience every moment of everyone's lives, and then relive those moments by telling others about it, all in the hopes of discovering truths about people and issues. Keirsey says these people are like fountains that bubble and splash, spilling over their own words to get it all out. Their enthusiasm is boundless and contagious, making them the most vivacious of all the types. They want to be seen by others as empathetic and benevolent. 

Champions crave intense emotional experiences and possess a great passion for novelty. Real life can become boring quickly. They are fiercely independent and don't like to submit themselves to others, including supervisors. They'd rather lead. They are good at reading others and notice suspicious motives immediately. They tend to be hyperalert, always ready for emergencies. 

ENFP's are rare, making up about two or three percent of the population. Famous ENFP's are Dave Thomas (founder of "Wendy's"), Samuel Clemens, Carol Burnett, Bill Cosby, Robin Williams, Dr. Suess, and Regis Philbin. In fiction, Ariel from The Little Mermaid and Dr. Doug Ross from ER are both ENFP's.

Some excellent employment options for the ENFP are inventor, entrepreneur, journalist, actor/comedian, or psychologist. You don't want your protagonist military leader to be an ENFP, or chaos will reign. Although, that could be fun.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 8

We are still discussing creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

We're a quarter of the way through these personality types. Stay strong! We'll cover them all in no time. Today we're looking at the ENFJ, or who Keirsey calls THE TEACHER. This person is a natural teacher (hence the name) with the uncanny ability to influence those around them. ENFJ's want to learn about the humanities, are preoccupied with morale, and work well with everyone. They see themselves as highly empathic, benevolent, and authentic. Often they mimic people they admire. They're also enthusiastic, love the idea of romance, want to be recognized for their hard work, and aspire to be wise. They practice diplomacy over strategy and tactics - they are the peacemakers. 

ENFJ's make up about two percent of the population, but that's enough. They are so charismatic, people around them tend to obey the Teacher's commands. They make excellent leaders and always have new ideas for group activities, often without a lot of pre-planning. They are natural hosts, making sure all guests are content and that there's plenty of activity to keep the group together. Teachers consider people their highest priority, and they communicate caring, concern, and a willingness to be friends with everyone. People often turn to ENFJ's for nurture and support. Sometimes ENFJ's can become too involved in the problems of others and become overwhelmed.

Famous ENFJ's include Ronald Reagan, Dr. Martin Luther King, Tommy Lee Jones, Oprah Winfrey, and Michael Jordan. Lisa Simpson from the Simpson's and Padme Amidala from Star wars are ENFJs.

If your novel needs a top-notch journalist, a diplomat, or a high school coach, the ENFJ is your choice for a base personality. If you need a software developer, a purchasing agent, or a firefighter, look somewhere else.

Next time, we'll look at yet another personality type.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 7

I'm continuing the heady notion of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Today we're covering INTJ (someone who veers towards introvert, intuitive, thinking, and judgement). Keirsey calls this person THE MASTERMIND. They are excellent at planning operations and contingency planning. Masterminds have a Plan A, but are always prepared to switch to Plan B, C, or D if necessary. They love to study science and technology. They are pragmatic and skeptical, and see themselves as ingenious, autonomous, and resolute. They trust reason, seek knowledge, and are prone to practice strategy far more than tactics or logistics. They love a great schedule. "Cost-effectiveness" is their motto.

Masterminds are rare in society, making up maybe one percent, and are rarely encountered outside their office or laboratory. They don't want to be the leader of any group, but will do a fine job if thrust into it. They are open-minded and will entertain new ideas or new procedures. Decisions come easy, and they have a drive to complete every project. Others tend to see INTJ's as cold and dispassionate, but they're just taking their tasks seriously. Indifference or criticism from others doesn't bother INTJ's in the least. 

INTJ's want harmony and order in their homes, but want their mates to be independent and strong-willed. Selection of a mate is a rational process, and they will not waste time on a second date if they realize the relationship won't work. They rely on their head, not their heart, to make decisions. They have a strong need for privacy, and aren't very outgoing or emotionally expressive, but they can be deeply emotional, even romantic, once they have found a person worthy of the affection. 

Famous INTJ's include Arnold Schwarzeneggar, C. Everett Koop, General Colin Powell, Jane Austin, and Stephen Hawking. From fiction, Ensign Ro Laren from Start Trek: The Next Generation, Mr. Darcy from Pride and Prejudice, and Gandalf the Grey from Lord of the Rings are all INTJ's.

Masterminds are outstanding in scientific research or business executives, so if you need a lab researcher or a computer programmer in your novel, you'll want an INTJ. If you need a lounge singer or a CEO, look elsewhere. Remember that, human nature being what it is, even people within the INTJ camp are going to be different from one another. Comparing Jane Austin with Arnold Schwarzeneggar, I'd have never guessed they were the same personality type. These typings are generalities. Once you plug in backstory, quirks, and flaws, you'll come up with a unique character for your novel. But if you use an INTJ in your novel, remember they'll always crave alone time, use facts more than feelings to make decisions, and will look at every possibility before making plans. 

We'll cover another personality type next time around.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 6

We are deep within a discussion of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

We've already looked at the ESTJ  and ISTJ (we took one trait from each base pair). Now let's look in-depth at the next personality type, the ENTJ. Keirsey calls this individual THE FIELDMARSHAL. These are the uber-leaders, the generals, the guys mobilizing the troops. The basic, driving force of the ENTJ is to achieve The Goal. Dwight Eisenhower and Douglas MacArthur were both ENTJ's. 

ENTJ's are utilitarian in how the implement their goals. They are preoccupied with science and technology, and work well with systems. They are pragmatic, skeptical, and focused. They see themselves as ingenious and autonomous. They are bound to lead others, and take command of any group within their sphere of influence. Sometimes they find themselves in charge of a group and are mystified as to how it happened, but they take charge of it anyway. They always climb to the top. They have a strong, natural urge to bring order and efficiency to everything. They are bent on using their skills to arrange, prioritize, and compile, and if given the opportunity, they always meet their goals. And often, they will offend people in the process and make enemies. They just don't care if they're offensive. The Goal must be reached.

For the ENTJ, there must be a reason for doing something, and other people's feelings are NOT a good reason. They are skilled at eliminating bureaucracy in the workplace, and if someone needs to be fired, the ENTJ is the man for the job. They will abandon any procedure that proves ineffective--they are the supreme pragmatists. They can get so caught up in a project that they block out other areas of life, especially home life.

At home, the ENJT is in full command. Their children know what is expected, which is complete obedience. ENTJ parents don't make a scene when there is disobedience in the house, they simply dole out appropriate punishment and move on.

A few famous ENTJ people are Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Patrick Stewart, Queen Elizabeth I, Dave Letterman, Rush Limbaugh, and Steve Jobs. From fiction, Princess Leia Organa and Jordi LaForge from Star Trek: The Next Generation were both ENTJs.

ENJT's seek occupations where they can utilize their skills: military leaders, CEO's, construction contractors, technology guru's, and university deans. This personality type makes up less than two percent of the population, so use them sparingly in your novels. And don't use them as secretaries, teachers, or fast-food workers. (Can you see Margaret Thatcher happily flipping burgers?) Of course, if you did put an ENTJ into one of these unsuitable occupations, you'd have a ton of conflict in your novel...

We'll look at another personality type next time.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 5

We are deep within a discussion of creating believable characters using the Myers-Briggs core personalities. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

In the last post, we looked at the ESTJ (we took one trait from each base pair). Now let's look in-depth at the next personality type, the ISTJ (note: this just happens to be me, so I consider myself an expert on this type. Follow along.)

The ISTJ is quiet and dependable, always seeking to fully understand things, and punctual to a fault. Keirsey calls this person THE INSPECTOR. Their motto is "rules must be obeyed." Inspectors are thorough in their inspections, making sure that no inconsistencies or irregularities get by. They work behind the scenes, content to do their work in quiet, by themselves.  ISTJ's are reserved and soft-spoken, and don't naturally aspire to leadership positions. They are most comfortable when everyone around them does their duty with diligence. Conflict upsets the ISTJ, and they tend to back away from it. They thrive on to-do lists and schedules. They are also exceptionally traditional.

Inspectors despise flashiness. They have no use for fashion, glamour, or luxury. Their words, clothes, and home environments are neat, orderly, plain, and practical. They choose personal property (cars, furniture, etc) based on price and durability rather than on comfort or appearance. They prefer the old-fashioned to the new-fangled, and are not attracted to exotic foods or locales when planning their vacations.

The ISTJs make excellent mates. They honor their marriage contract and are faithful until death. Their word is their bond. Duty is another huge buzz-word for the Inspector. They enjoy social outings and gatherings, but if it gets too crowded, the ISTJ heads for the back door or a dark corner. They value ceremony and ritual. Weddings, anniversaries, and birthdays are significant events and will be honored with appropriate gifts or words of congratulation.

They make up about ten percent of the population. Some famous ISTJ people are Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, George H. W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, and Anthony Hopkins. I can't confirm this with inside sources, but I'm certain that Katniss Everdeen from The Hunger Games is an ISTJ. My husband read the book and said, "Look, Sonja, they put you in a book." But that's a post for another day.

Because of their attention to detail, ISTJ's make excellent bank examiners, auditors, accountants, or tax attorneys. They don't take monetary chances -- with their own money or someone else's -- so you'll never find an ISTJ working as a stock broker or an investor. It's not likely you'll find ISTJ's working comfortably in the performance industry, food service industry, or the sex trade. If you need a prostitute in your novel, don't make her an ISTJ. Ditto a fast food cashier or a jazz singer. She wouldn't be a good nurse, either. But if you need a librarian, dentist, legal secretary, or high school teacher, then ISTJ is what you want.

Side note: speaking from experience, ISTJ's prefer being by themselves, but can learn to interact with people as if they were extroverted. I don't feel comfortable talking to strange people, but I can do it when I have to. So don't stick too rigidly to the personality types - theres' room for subtlety. A sensing person (who relies heavily on the five senses for collecting facts) can also dip into intuition to make a decision. It just isn't their first inclination. A thinking person can take into account someone else's feelings. It's not a natural thing to do, but if they try, it's doable. So don't feel boxed in when using these personality traits. Use them to build a base, then feel free to alter them as necessary. I actually worked in a fast-food restaurant once. I was more comfortable in the back making food than up front taking money, but I learned to take orders and cash because my boss wanted me to do it. And pleasing my boss was important to me as an ISTJ. An ESFP wouldn't bother pleasing the boss but would instead do what she pleased or quit. (We'll cover that trait in a different post). So when you feel the need to stray from the base personality, make sure it's a believable stray.

We'll cover another personality in the next post. Stay tuned!

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 4

I'm still talking about creating believable characters. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. 

Now that we've explored the four base pairs involved in personalities, let's have some fun. It's time to mix and match. You remember the four parts:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Now we just pick one trait from each base. If you're a math person, you realize there are 16 possibilities. Check it out:

Someone who is extroverted, sensing, thinking, and judgment is called ESTJ in the Myers-Briggs game. The letters aren't so important, but it's much easier to type the four letters than typing the words out. Stay with me. 

Keirsey calls this person THE SUPERVISOR. She is self-appointed to keep everyone in line. She likes being in a group, and she likes taking charge of it. She prefer facts to opinions and is highly practical. She will not be spontaneous (that's a perception trait) or particularly tactful (that's a feeling trait), and will not indulge in speculation, imagination, or fantasy (that would be the intuitive).

The ESTJ is eager to enforce the rules, and expects others to follow the rules or face the consequences--and this includes employees, offspring, and spouse. ESTJ's make excellent workers. They obey their superiors, and are comfortable issuing orders to subordinates. They are not always responsive to other points of view or to the emotions of others, and can be seen by others as rude or tactless.

ESTJ's are preoccupied with morality and worry about society falling apart, morality decaying, standards being undermined, and traditions being lost. They see themselves as dependable and respectable. Others see them as fatalistic and pessimistic, and that doesn't bother the ESTJ. She really doesn't care what others think about her. ESTJ's make up about ten percent of the population, so you'll run into lots of these people in life and in fiction.

Some famous ESTJ's are George W. Bush, Bette Davis, the Reverend Billy Graham, and Lucy from the Peanuts.

This type of person finds great success in occupations that require a high degree of dedication and disciple: corporate law, politics, police work, military service, and business. You will NOT find an ESTJ working as an artist/performer, a writer, or a sex trade worker. 

So, if you need a prostitute in your story, she won't be an ESTJ. If, however, you need an excellent vice cop or a drill sergeant, the ESTJ is the perfect fit! Other good careers for the ESTJ include lawyer, chief information officer, and dentist. Make sure, when you're creating your character, that you don't veer from the base personality, or he won't be believable to the exalted reader. There's room for quirks, idiosyncrasies, phobias, and aberrations, but they need to fit within the framework of the personality type. Later, I'll get into how to incorporate these exciting bits into the base personality.

Can you now see how this personality stuff can help you create believable characters? Are you excited about it now? Are you dying to study the next one? It's coming up in the next post.

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 3

Thanks for coming back to this deliciously useful series on creating believable characters. I'm posting a day early because it wouldn't be right to interrupt Thanksgiving to read a blog post. So today's entertainment--I mean, blog post--finishes what I started last Monday, and includes quite a bit of info from The Myers & Briggs Foundation website. 

The four base pairs of all personalities are:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Let's finish the definitions.

3.  The third pair, thinking or feeling, deal with how people make decisions.

Thinking: Someone who is tough-minded and objective. They find the truth or principle to be applied, regardless of the situation. They analyze pros and cons, then try to be logical. They try to be impersonal and don't let other's wishes (or their own) get in the way. They enjoy technical and scientific fields of study. They notice inconsistencies. They want to be fair, and believe that telling the truth is far more important than being tactful. They are sometimes seen as too task-oriented, uncaring, or indifferent.

Feeling: Someone who weighs what people care about and the points-of-view of the other people involved in the situation. Values are important, and the establishment of harmony is the most important thing. This person is seen by others as caring, warm, and tactful. They are communication-oriented, and feel nervous when conflict exists. They make decisions with their heart and want to be seen as compassionate. Others sometimes see them as too idealistic, mushy, or indirect.

4.  The last pair, judgment or perception, deals with how people live their lives.

Judgment: Someone who prefers a planned or orderly way of life. They like to have things settled and organized. They feel more comfortable when decisions are made, and crave control. They may not FEEL like this on the inside, but this is how they want the world to view them. They like to appear task-oriented (and may even BE task-oriented). They like making  to-do lists. They do their work before they play. They work solidly toward a deadline so they don't have to do a last-minute rush. They focus on the goal, and sometimes miss new information.

Perceiving: Someone who prefers a flexible and spontaneous way of life. They want to understand and adapt to the world, not organize it. They are open to new experiences and information. They are seen as loose and casual. They like to keep planning to a minimum. They mix work with play, find stimulation in approaching deadlines, and work in bursts of energy. They sometimes miss making necessary decisions because they're so open to new information.

Now that we've examined the base pairs, we can go on to mix and match. We'll cover that, and more, in the next exciting installments. Same bat time, same bat channel!

-Sonja

Believable Characters, Part 2

Thanks for coming back to this deliciously useful series on creating believable characters. I'm pulling from several sources, but mostly Jeff Gerke's book Plot vs. Character and David Keirsey's book Please Understand Me II. Today's post includes quite a bit of info from The Myers & Briggs Foundation website. In my last post, I listed the eight parts that going into making a full personality. Today I'm going to define half the terms. I'll hit the other half in the next post.

The four parts are:

1.  Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

2.  Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

3.  Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

4.  Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

Let's jump into the definitions.

1.  The first pair, extrovert or introvert, deal with where people put their attention and get their energy. (Note: for all of these, everyone experiences both patterns, but everyone leans more toward one than the other.)

Extrovert: Someone who is expressive and outgoing, who re-energizes by being with other people (the more the merrier). Someone who feels at home in the world and loves to make things happen. When faced with a problem, extroverts feel the need to talk about it, preferably with lots of people. They are more likely to jump into a project without allowing enough time to think it over.

Introvert: Someone who is reserved and seclusive, who re-energizes by being alone and dealing with ideas, pictures, memories, and internal workings. Introverts don't necessarily avoid crowds, but they feel more comfortable in small groups or alone. They take time to reflect on ideas and are careful making decisions. They often enjoy the idea more than experiencing the real thing. They prefer having a few, close friends then making tons of friends they don't know very well.

2.  The second pair, sensing or intuitive, deal with how people deal with incoming information. 

Sensing: Someone who is highly observant to the physical reality around them and what they see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. They are concerned with what is actual, present, current, and real. They notice facts and remember details. They look for the practical use of things and enjoy learning, and experience is the best way to learn. They work through problems by examining all the facts. They don't always see possibilities.

Intuitive: Someone who is introspective or highly imaginative, who pays more attention to impressions or the meaning and patterns rather than the information itself. They work through problems by thinking them through, as opposed to hands-on. They're interested in new things and what might be possible. They love to speculate on the future. They work with symbols and abstract theories. They are likely to remember events more as impressions than what actually happened. They are excellent at "reading between the lines" and envisioning new possibilities. 

That should keep you thinking until my next post, when I'll cover thinking/feeling and judgment/perception.

-Sonja

Oh, no. Not another series... Believable Characters Part 1

Yep, it's that time again. Time for me to devote the next 16-20 posts to a single topic--of my choosing--that I find interesting. Hopefully, you'll also enjoy it. Deep thought goes into choosing these series. (Actually, it's whatever I'm struggling with at the moment and feel the need to study more in-depth.)

This quarter, I've been struggling with absolutely everything. Writing is no longer fun for me. I'm vacillating between panic mode, compulsive eating mode, and it's-all-rubbish mode. Mostly, I'm staying in the it's-all-rubbish mode, and that's a pretty rough place to be. To be honest, I've opened the file that holds my novel at least six times in the last four days, and haven't done a thing to it. I get all woozy feeling and shut it down before I faint.

So it's time to get my mind back on track. Time to get back into my story. Time to dig into what the experts say and hope to find some inspiration. 

This series' expert is Jeff Gerke, from Where The Map Ends, Marcher Lord Press, and FictionAcademy.com. I picked up his book Plot vs. Character a while back and blitzed right through it. Twice. Now it's time to pull some things out to share with you (and hope that some of it sticks in my brain long enough to get it into my novel). The focus will be mainly on creating believable characters. Gerke depends heavily on the Myers-Briggs personality test and the book Please Understand Me II by David Keirsey. 

The first step in creating a believable character is to begin with a core personality. Myers-Briggs (MB) says there's 16 of 'em. The Thompson Concept says there's eight, and I've heard there are other systems that come up with different numbers. But I'm sticking with MB because that's what Gerke did. (By the way, we won't actually get to Gerke's text for awhile because there are other things to look at, first.)

So let's dig in to the first MB personality type and figure out what to do with it in a novel. There are eight parts to a personality, according to MB. Before we can play with them, we need to know what they mean. Then we can mix and match to come up with a core personality that's believable. After that, we add the extra quirks, flaws, and idiosyncrasies. These eight parts are four sets of opposites. People either veer toward one end or the other. These four parts are:

Extrovert (E) or Introvert (I)

Sensing (S) or Intuitive (N)

Thinking (T) or Feeling (F)

Judgment (J) or Perception (P)

According to the MB system, every person has a combination of these elements. When you mix and match every possibility, you end up with 16 core personalities. And that's where the fun starts. 

I'll take my time over the next umpteen posts to look in-depth at these combinations, what they mean by themselves, and what fun you can have mixing and matching when creating characters for novels. Then we'll dig into Gerke's book and see what he says to do with these characters once we've built them.

For what it's worth,

-Sonja

Guilt vs. Fear

Mike Duran recently posted a blog about blogging, specifically a condition he calls Shizo-blog. Here are the symptoms (copied word for word from his blog so you don't have to read it if you don't want to):

* You feel guilty for blogging because you should be writing your novel

* You feel guilty for writing because you haven't updated your blog in two weeks

* You feel guilty prioritizing one over the other because with some creative management or self-discipline, you should be able to do both

* You feel guilty about feeling guilty because you expected this writer's gig would be a lot more fun.

To add to the misery, he quoted from Rachelle Gardner's blog, where she stated that one of the biggest turn-offs in blogs is when a writer has irregular or infrequent posts.

I have experienced all those guilty feelings from the list. I have been guilty of irregular and infrequent posts. I have been guilty of playing computer games when I should be writing (blogs AND novels). 

And I have discovered that feeling the guilt doesn't actually motivate me to do what I'm supposed to do. I can happily play solitaire all day long while the guilt simmers in the backfield. At the end of the day, when I have nothing to show for my time, I just think to myself, "I'll do something tomorrow - today was a mental health break."

I seem to need quite a few of those mental health breaks. What's going on? I love to write. I love the feeling I get after a long writing section that produces bunches of good words, all in the right order, and on topic. So why is blogging harder than writing novels? It's not like I have a word count to meet. I definitely don't run out of things to say (just ask my husband).

I've discovered the true problem: I'm worried that my readers won't find what I have to say interesting. I'll bore you into moving on to the next blogger before you've finished reading what I wrote. And you won't leave me comments. And Google Analytics will tell me that only three people read my blog. And they only stick around for 3.4 seconds. And I'm one of those three people, checking to see if the thing actually posted.

So there you have it. The problem isn't guilt. It's fear. The solution? Quit being a wuss. Two readers isn't so bad, is it? It's better than none. 

-Sonja

NaNo progress

I announced my intention to use the frenzy of November NaNoWriMo to finish the edits on my Cassandra story, and that you, my loyal blog readers, were to keep me accountable. So here's my progress report:

I'm on page 116 of 350. I've written four new scenes, altered the pacing of the first 50 pages, and changed the first two visions from 3rd person to 1st person. I've also re-arranged the sequence of the visions so that they get progressively scarier.
Bottom line: I'm not that far. I'm going to have to pick up the pace if I want to finish on time. Scold me in private, please, so it's not quite so humiliating.

-Sonja

All Hallows Read

Over at The Kill Zone, author Clare Langley-Hawthorne wrote about giving away scary books for Halloween. Read the post for details, if you're interested. What caught my attention were the questions she posted at the end. She asked, "Which book was the scariest you ever read?" and "Has there ever been a book so terrifying that you couldn't even finish it?"

I'm a wimp when it comes to scary books. I don't read too many. But when I was a teenager, I couldn't get enough of Stephen King. His books answer both those questions for me. The scariest book I ever read was Pet Sematary. Interestingly, Stephen King says writing that book scared him so much, he had trouble finishing it. I don't doubt that. It was the intensity, the unexpected twists, that made the book such a terrifying read. 

The second scariest book I ever read was It by Stephen King. I had nightmares for decades after that one, but it was the movie version that haunted me more than the book. I didn't actually watch the movie. My husband did. I just happened to be wandering by the living room on the way to the kitchen when I inadvertently saw the shower scene. You know it--where the clown comes up through the shower drain to do whatever he needed to do. For years, I couldn't take a shower without watching the drain intently. Do you know how hard it is to rinse shampoo out of your hair when you can't close your eyes?

There are a lot of books I never finished, but mostly that was due to bad writing, uninteresting plot, or unlikable characters. But one scary book stands out in my mind because I picked up, then put it down, too scared to continue. Then I'd pick it up at a later date, only to put it down again, pick it up, put it down (you get the picture). I finally finished it, and wished I hadn't. That was Stephen King's Misery. It was the hopelessness of the protagonist's situation that got me, and even thinking about that plot line sends shivers down my back.

Those are my answers to Clare's questions. What about you, loyal followers? Which book was the scariest you ever read? Has there ever been a book so terrifying that you couldn't finish it?

-Sonja 

The NaNo Challenge (aka No More Whining)

I've been lazy. Or bored. Or terrified. No, lazy is the word needed here. In September, Andy Meisenheimer at The Editorial Department critiqued my latest novel, CASSANDRA'S CURSE. He didn't tear it apart. He packed fifty pounds of C4 into chapter 3 and stepped back. Granted, the story really needed an explosion of that magnitude to get it moving in the right direction, but I'll admit the damage put me into a state of shock. 

I emerged ready to do what needed to be done, only to fall into a pit of depression. I'd had enough. It's too hard. The process is too long. Whine, whine, whine. (You've all probably heard this before.) Thankfully, I have a friend who kicked my behind out of that pit by saying she wouldn't let me quit. She's that powerful.

So I re-structured the novel via a new outline. I integrated a list of new scenes that need to be added. I identified the weak scenes that need to be deleted or seriously revised.

Now it's time to do the work. And since November is coming, all I see in the blogosphere are NaNoWriMo posts and hints for making November a successful writing month. I'm taking advantage of this euphoria/frenzy. I'm setting a goal: finish the edits on CASSANDRA'S CURSE by November 30 so I can send the revised manuscript to the literary agent who wants to see it. 

With my goal published here, you, my four loyal readers, are in the enviable position of keeping me accountable. I'll share my progress at the end of November. If I succeed, gift cards are welcome. Failure is not an option. 

I'll keep you posted.

-Sonja

Got Prompts?

James Scott Bell shared a site at his Kill Zone Authors blog that needs to be shared. He saw this site as providing insight into backstory for developing characters. I see it as a great way to get NaNoWriMo started. Check it out.  Click here, add your six words, and watch the magic happen.  

-Sonja

How to Fix a Haunted House

November's issue of Popular Mechanics had this tantalizing line right on the cover: HOW TO FIX A HAUNTED HOUSE. No matter what genre you read or write, that line grabs your attention like a frisky pit bull. I figured there had to be something in there to wake a writer's imagination.

Let me quote the beginning of the article. "Every house has secrets. Doors open or shut themselves. Lights flicker randomly. A toilet flushes on its own. And there's that deathly odor. You've been catching whiffs of it for years now, but you still can't seem to locate the source. Sorry, but your house is creepy."

The article then pinpoints areas of your creepy house that could be causing these problems.
* A ghastly stink from the sink could be the olfactory trace of something horrible that happened there. Or maybe it's the result of a dry sink trap.
* Lights that shut themselves on and off could be a carpet-covered monster chewing on the wiring in your electrical panel. Or maybe it's just loose/frayed wiring.

* Doors that slam shut on their own could be the ghost of Aunt Mary letting you know she still needs to wear a sweater around your drafty old house. Or maybe the doors are hung poorly and sway to every little puff of wind.

As a writer, this article is a gold mine. Who doesn't love a good scare now and then? But in my books, I don't want to rely on the supernatural to spook my protagonist. Knowing a physical fault in the house can cause a freak-out on a dark night is much better than relying on the aliens, ghosts, or evil spirits making mischief. Check out the article and find new ways of adding a little suspense to your scenes, courtesy of an old house.

-Sonja

Say That Again, Please

All of us do it. All of us have them. A favorite word or a pet phrase that gets repeated in our manuscript a little too often, and we're not even aware of it. I'm not talking about 'and' or 'the' or 'it.' Usually it's a descriptive word, one with several meanings, that show up over and over again.

I'm talking about actions as beats: characters who shrug, shaking heads, grinning lips, rolling eyes (which is really gross, if you stop and think about it.) Or repeated adjectives: dark eyes, dark thoughts, dark shadows, dark desires. Strong verbs we can't help but overuse: stalked, pounded, raced, shattered.

Some words or phrases that tend to appear too often in my own works are agape, shuddered, and instinctive. I've got one character who clenches his jaw too often, and another who cringes at every surprise. The Most Often Used award goes to "a chill raced down her spine."

It's extremely hard to find these babies, too, because they're lodged in our brains and disappear when we proof-read. That's where an excellent beta-reader comes in. If you don't have one, you need one. I found my two best at a writer's conference and an on-line forum for writers. The key is to not chose a friend or a relative for your beta reader, because they love you and don't want to hurt your feelings. My beta readers started out as strangers, but now we're close friends. They're still honest with me, so I see no need to replace them, and that's how it should be.

For what it's worth,
-Sonja

Less is More

There's no need to point it out to me, I've faltered on my weekly blog postings. You'll hear no excuses from me. I just didn't do them. But I'm here now, ready to get back on schedule. Randy Ingermanson sent out his monthly writing e-zine today, and the first article is on organization. I'm an extremely organized person (let's give my husband a minute to quit laughing... breathe, David, breathe...), so I usually skim this part of the article and head to the meat about writing. But today, I stopped to take a look at the organization section.

Randy said, "less is more." He admitted it's not original to him, nor is it difficult to grasp. If you have ten project you're working on, and you cut five of them, you've doubled the amount of time you can spend on the five you kept.

What's more, if you cut the interruptions (don't look at the email program, don't answer the phone, don't respond when the kids yell the cat is on fire...) your mind has fewer things to think about and it's easier to concentrate on the task at hand.

What about the five you cut? Does that mean they'll never get done? Nope. Set them aside for later. Finish the first five, then move on to the next five. (Note: I think "five" is an arbitrary number. Fill in whatever works for you.)
Less (as in "fewer projects") means more time to focus, to pay attention to details, to get it right. Less also means less distractions, less frustration, less stress.
My project list is unique. It's a whole lot of home school and house maintenance stuff, and squeeze in fun "me" time when I can. It's especially hard this week when the kids and I are all sick. None of these projects can be set aside for "later" (who wants me to wait three weeks to do a load of laundry or cook dinner?), so I'm left with the "fun" stuff in life: church choir, fellowship with friends, conquering the world (playing Civilization, a highly addictive computer game), and writing.
This week, I'm giving up Civilization to work on my novel. It's going to be tough, but I'm certain the end product will be satisfying.
-Sonja

It's time to panic now

Last July, I sent my latest manuscript to a literary agent. She responded that she enjoyed the beginning of the book, but around the middle it started to fall apart. She suggested I send it to a professional editor to see what it would take to fix the manuscript. Then, after I fixed it, I could resubmit it to her.

I followed her advice. I sent my manuscript to Andy Meisenheimer at The Editorial Department, along with a bucket of cash, and waited the requisite four weeks. (Side note: I met Andy at an ACFW conference several years ago, where he read the opening pages of my fantasy novel, and he gave me excellent advice back then. So I trusted him completely with my new romantic suspense novel.)

Andy's response came last night, just as I was headed out to my son's baseball game. I was extremely surprised to find that it was only six pages long. I figured a bucket of cash ought to get me closer to 25 pages of notes. But seeing it was only six made me think the book wasn't so bad. Maybe he couldn't find that much to comment on. Maybe all it I needed was to clean up some lagging scenes, tighten a bit of description, and flesh out a major character a bit more.

Then I read what he wrote. He thought my ideas were good, my dialogue clever, my main character well-rounded. BUT. He found a major problem in the plot. Then he went on to describe what went wrong and how to fix it. I think I went into shock, because his words quit registering in my brain somewhere around page 2 of the comments. Instead of fighting my addled thought processes, I printed the file and took it with me to the ball game. 

I read Andy's comments. Twice. They weren't all sunshine and polish. My poor manuscript needs a TON of work. Not just cleaning up a few scenes. Not just removing pesky adverbs that managed to hide from the delete key during the first several read-throughs. I'm talking *major restructuring* to heighten tension, create uncertainty, and foster sympathy for the protagonist. I'm talking about altering the theme that inspired the novel in the first place. I'm talking about a fifty percent re-write. Or more.

Wow. Andy did an awesome job on his critique, but I'm thoroughly overwhelmed by the amount of work ahead of me. You know the five stages of writing: excitement, delusions of grandeur, panic, compulsive eating, and delivery. I'm deeply entrenched in panic mode. I get to have a half-hour chat with Andy as part of the services I paid for, so I need to make up a list of questions--intelligent, coherent questions--regarding his critique. I may need several days and copious amounts of chocolate and coffee before I fight my way out of panic mode. 

For what it's worth, I'd send another novel to Andy for critique. Only next time, I know to brace myself more firmly.

-Sonja

Finding Your Theme

Randy Ingermanson's book, Writing Fiction For Dummies, has an excellent chapter on Theme. My favorite part was the section of twenty examples. Seeing a theme statement in the book is much easier than trying to envision one myself. I offered some of those examples in my previous post. The next section I want to dwell on is called "Finding Your Theme."

If someone asks you what your book is about, and it's a romance, you could say, "My story is about the enduring power of love." If you're writing a thriller, say, "My story is about the power of ________________." Fill in the blank. Randy offers "fear" or "ambition." Or "ignorance," "knowledge," "the little guy," "multinational corporations," "religion," or "technology." Any word that's remotely related to your story will give you a quick and easy answer to that tough question. Fantasy and horror writers can say "it's the battle between good and evil." Mystery writers can say, "justice prevails." (I guess "it's the battle between good and evil" can also work for mysteries.)

Randy says it's okay if you never move past this vague platitude. "You aren't required to have a unique and dazzling theme for your story." Woo hoo! I can come up with vague platitudes and be satisfied with it. But Larry Brooks started this whole thing by saying that theme is necessary for Successful Writing. He said, "the more you value and cultivate the themes in your stories, the better those stories will be." So I can stick with a vague platitude, and hope a decent theme comes through my writing, or I can really delve into building a great theme and come up with a great book.

Randy offers hope to those, like me, who want to take it further. Once you've identified your theme, he says to read through the manuscript in one sitting, marking places where the theme could be highlighted a little. The key word is little. Subtlety reigns here. Resist the urge to explain. The reader is smart and will figure it out. "What you're looking for is places in your novel where the theme emerges naturally but it comes out fuzzy or distorted. Clarify those." 

Also look for places where the theme is too blatant and trim it back. Theme that shows up in large bits of narrative summary probably have too much author intrusion. Cut these back. If the theme emerges in the protagonist's dialogue or interior monologue, then it's probably okay, especially if it advances the story. If the theme emerges in the protagonist's actions, then that's a keeper.

Then look for places in the manuscript where the theme is contradicted. Resolve this by either removing the contradiction or by having the protagonist notice the paradox and work through it. This actually makes the story stronger, because the protagonist reinforces his or her belief system this way.

That concludes my study on theme. I hope you got as much out of it as I did. Please comment if you had an epiphany--that'll really make my day!

-Sonja

Randy Ingermanson Knows Theme

I'm eight posts into my study on theme. I've grasped the concept of what theme is. I cannot, yet, identify theme easily in other's works (or my own), but I understand the concept. I've studied writing books by Larry Brooks, James Scott Bell, and Donald Maass. Now I'm studying Randy Ingermanson's book, Writing Fiction For Dummies.

All these books held something of value for my study, but Randy's is the easiest to understand. (Note: I always refer to other authors by their last name out of respect, but in this case, I think I can call Randy by his first name. We're Facebook friends. We've met in person several times, too.) 

As I said before I got off track, Randy's chapter on theme is easy to read, easy to understand, and easy to paraphrase in a short blog post. He says, "Theme is the deep meaning of your book. It's the central message you're trying to get across to your reader... the moral of the story." He then offers twenty examples of famous books and their themes. He reiterates (as Brooks did) that readers take away different things from novels, so there could be multiple themes identified for a single story. 

I'd like to offer a few of Randy's examples, as they helped me immensely.

Outlander, by Diana Gabaldon: "Love conquers all." 

The Lovely Bones, by Alice Sebold: "There is justice in this universe."

The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger: "There is a love that transcends time."

Contact, by Carl Sagan: "God is a mathematician."

Gorky Park, by Martin Cruz Smith: "No good deed goes unpunished."

Blink, by Ted Dekker: "God is in control, whether you think so or not."

The Firm, by John Grisham: "Be careful what you wish for."

The Hunt for Red October, by Tom Clancy: "The Evil Empire will destroy itself through its own incompetence."

The thing that struck me was how general these themes are. If I said, "Guess which book has the theme that love conquers all," nearly any romance title will be the right answer. "Justice prevails" works the same way. The theme of my latest book is, "There is great peril and price to seeking justice." (You probably already guessed, but my husband came up with that one. I'm no longer clueless about what theme IS, but identifying it and putting it into a sentence is still beyond my grasp. Maybe someday.)

In the next post, I'll offer you Randy's advice on finding your theme if you don't already know what it is.

-Sonja

Theme Through Symbol

I'm examining the chapter on Theme from Writing the Breakout Novel by Donald Maass. He starts the chapter with a definition of theme, then gives a quick overview of how to build theme into your story. Then he breaks off into a discussion on symbols.

When I saw this, I shuddered. I mostly understand symbols, but I don't consciously construct them in my stories. They just sort of happen. My critique partner usually writes a note in the text about "nice use of symbolism here" and I smile and accept the praise and have no clue what she's talking about. I don't know why I struggle with symbols, since they're much more tangible than Theme or Concept or Big Idea, but the fact is, they elude me. So when Maass launched into a discussion about how symbols can enhance theme, I had doubts that this section would enhance my understanding of theme. 

Maass stated, "The most effective pattern to follow is that of a single symbol that recurs." Like the ring in Lord of the Rings. It wasn't a ring, a sword, a comb, and a sack of flour. Just a ring. Then came the words that made me feel a bit better about myself. "They [symbols] are frequently present in a novel whether the author intended them to be or not... Evoking symbols is often a matter of making use of what is already there." 

Randy Ingermanson identified the theme from Lord of the Rings as this: "Good ultimately conquers evil, because evil defeats itself." (I got that out of his book Writing Fiction For Dummies, which I'll be delving into in the next post, so hold your horses.) 

I agree that this statement properly identifies the theme to Lord of the Rings. I agree that Frodo's ring is a symbol in the story. But I still don't understand how Frodo's ring symbolized this theme. The ring wasn't good. Nor did it defeat itself. What did it symbolize? I don't have a clue (again, understanding these things really isn't in my skills set). So I asked my husband. He said the ring symbolized universal power and the universal degradation of the soul. Oh, that's good. I agree. But, again, I don't see the connection between the symbol and the theme.

Maybe I'm doomed to never understand this concept. If you got it, please enlighten me. I'm feeling rather obtuse at the moment.

-Sonja

Donald Maass Weighs In On Theme

I'm still studying theme. If you're bored, just remember that this is probably good for you. If you totally understand theme and can't figure out why I'm struggling, give me a call and straighten me out. But until the phone rings, I'm forging ahead. I've already examined the lessons from Larry Brooks and James Scott Bell. Today, I'm in Donald Maass's book Writing the Breakout Novel.

Maass starts out with a humorous analogy. You're at a party, trapped in a conversation with some who has nothing to say. You try to smoothly get away, but you can't escape. You are trapped. 

When readers pick up a boring book that says nothing, they don't worry about a smooth exit. They toss the book across the room and find something better to do. According to Maass, readers are opinionated. They seek out novels that hold closely to those opinions. Military guys read techno-thrillers. Scientists read sci-fi. Women read romance. (I know, that's stereotypical. I'm a non-scientific, non-military woman, and I read sci-fi and techno-thrillers but won't touch a romance. You get his meaning, though--stereotypes exist for a reason.)

"Readers want to have their values validated," Maass continues. "They may not want to be converted, but they do want to be stretched. They want to feel that at the end of the book their views were right but that they were arrived at after a struggle... When conflicting ideals, values or morals are set against each other in a novel, it grips our imaginations because we ache to resolve that higher conflict."

Maass and Bell agree: theme has to do with the character's values, morals, and worldview. They also agree that theme isn't "added to the story at the end, like cheese baked on top of a casserole in its final twenty minutes in the oven." Theme is intrinsic to the story. It emerges from the hero's actions, thoughts, and dialogue. Theme is the character's higher motivations: "the search for truth, a thirst for justice, a need to hope, a longing for love."

Giving your protagonist the inner fire of deep motivations results in powerful theme. Don't get preachy: moderation, restraint, and understatement are crucial. But when these powerful motivators flow through the protagonist's actions, thoughts, and dialogue, you will achieve Theme. 

Hallelujah! I understand! Give my heroine a strong worldview, set her up against someone with an opposite worldview, watch them interact, and a theme will emerge. I can do that. The hard part, for me, is identifying that theme. But I'm glad to know it's there. 

In the next post, I'm delving into something even stickier: using symbols to enhance theme. 

-Sonja

What Does James Scott Bell Have To Say About Theme?

I've been studying a book by Larry Brooks called Story Engineering: Mastering the Six Core Competencies of Successful Writing. When I got to the chapter on theme, I found my eyes glazing over as I read. I didn't get it. Theme isn't tangible, like a character's hair color or a villain's choice of weaponry, and understanding intangible things isn't part of my skills set. So I went to my personal library and grabbed a couple of books that had something to say about theme. James Scott Bell's book Revision & Self-Editing had an entire chapter devoted to the subject, so I had to check it out and pass along to you my new-found wisdom.

Bell says theme is a big idea, a message that the story contains. "Look to the characters, and what they're fighting for, and you'll find the theme of your story."

That doesn't sound too hard. Then he says something even more comforting: "Don't worry about theme. Worry about struggle. Give your characters humanity and passionate commitment to a set of values. Set them in conflict and as they fight, the theme will take care of itself." I love that last part! It will take care of itself. I don't have to worry about...

Then I remembered that Larry Brooks said that we shouldn't let theme just happen -- we should consciously build it into our stories, or we might end up with a mess. Which is correct? Build it myself, or let it happen?

If I'm understand these men correctly, it's a bit of both. Bell says to build my hero with depth, passion, and a strong worldview. Then, when the conflict comes, the hero will react based on these beliefs. Out of that emerges theme. Theme will shine through the main character's dialogue and inner monologues. Theme will be reflected in the metaphors and symbols I choose (if they're chosen well and truly reflect the hero). Theme will resonate in the last chapter, in the last sentence. Theme will Be There. And it didn't "just happen," because I worked on building those meanings, those messages, into the hero's make-up.

Bell ends the chapter with three exercises. I couldn't actually do the first one, but something in the instructions grabbed me. It goes like this: "Many of us hated 'theme' exercises in literature class." (I totally agree with this statement -- I loathed them. I usually copied off the kid in front of me.) Then came the most important part: "Maybe this is because there's so much debate about themes. Critics often disagree about a book's meaning." What a reassuring thing to hear! If the *critics* can't nail down theme, how can I? I'm not using that as a cop-out. I'm putting extra effort into identifying the theme of my book. But it's good to know I probably won't get it wrong. The critics can disagree all they want about the theme of my book, and that won't bother me a bit.

I've got more to share, so stay tuned.

-Sonja

Implementing Theme

Larry Brooks, in his book  Story Engineering: Mastering the Six Core Competencies of Successful Writing, attempted to teach me about theme. Thankfully, building a theme into my story is a skill that can be taught. Unfortunately, I'm a slow learner when it comes to abstract ideas. In high school lit class, I was always the last one to figure out the theme of the story. Now that I'm writing my own stories, I'd better figure out how to do it. After all, Brooks says, "The more you value and cultivate the themes in your stories, the better those stories will be." I want my stories to be fantastic, so I've got to master this concept of theme.

I'll admit, I'm only six pages into the chapter and I'm feeling a little stupid. Brooks says theme is the meaning of the story. It reflects me. And then he says theme divides into two realms: stories where theme emerges from character, and stories in which the character experience has been crafted to focus on and communicate a specific theme.

He gives two examples. In The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown's point of view comes out clearly about issues of religion, the church, and the veracity of history. The plot and character arc specifically pointed to this theme, to challenge the reader's belief systems and values.

The Cider House Rules by John Irving speaks about right-to-life issues, like abortion and orphanages. Unlike Dan Brown, John Irving didn't land on one side of the issue. He explored all sides of it, allowing the reader to experience the emotions of both sides and thus decide if his or her opinion has shifted after reading the book. 

Brook says, "Brown was selling us a point of view on an issue, while Irving was exploring an issue."

I clearly see the difference between these two realms. I can't identify which of them MY story fits into, but I understand them. That's a step in the right direction!

-Sonja

Theme Happens

I'm continuing my study on theme in the hopes that I'll actually understand it once I'm done writing several blog posts about it. Larry Brooks started me down this path with his book  Story Engineering: Mastering the Six Core Competencies of Successful Writing. 

Deep in the heart of the chapter about theme, Mr. Brooks says this: "You can't write about life experience without saying something about life's experiences. When a story is strong enough, when a character is deep enough, and when the conceptual landscape is universal and accessible, theme happens."

Huh. After reading that, I figured I'm in hot water. A theme will just happen in my story if it's strong enough, if the character is deep enough, when all this other gunk is universal and accessible? How do I know if I did it right? How do I know if it's deep enough? What does accessible mean?

Thankfully, Mr. Brooks went on: "Sometimes this works, sometimes not. The more you want your story to say something specific about life and the world in which it unfolds, the more you can't rely on this organic emergence of theme."

Whew! Brooks then said it's like flying an airplane. I can understand how the plane gets off the ground, but I wouldn't be able to fly one if someone handed me the controls. I've got to learn how to create/build theme. I need "a working knowledge of theme implementation," says Brooks.

The good news: it can be learned. 

The bad news: I'm not there yet.

-Sonja

Theme: By Larry Brooks

A new book arrived in the mail Saturday, and I couldn't help but dive in. It's Story Engineering: Mastering the Six Core Competencies of Successful Writing by Larry Brooks. I was swimming along fantastically until I got to the third core competency, theme.

I'll admit, abstract ideas are tough for me. I'm a math/music type of person. If it's tangible, touchable, tastable, I can grasp it. But the chapter on theme was wibbly wobbly. My brain went *huh*and then shut down, refusing to try it again.

Since Mr. Brooks says theme is necessary for Successful Writing, I figured I should comprehend this nebulous monstrosity. So I went to my library, grabbed all my craft-of-writing books that had a section on theme, and started reading. Over the next several posts, I'll share what I've discovered in the hopes that in explaining it all to you, my three loyal blog readers, I might actually figure some of it out for myself.

I'll start with the definition offered by Mr. Brooks. "Theme is what our story means. How it relates to reality and life in general... Theme is the relevance of your story to life."

Sounds simple, but I didn't quite get it. My story has meaning? It relates to life in general? It's relevant? I thought it was just a great mystery with plenty of suspense, a little romance, and a lot of Greek culture. How could I NOT know my story meant something? And if it does mean something, WHAT, exactly, does it mean? I had to keep reading.

I came to this statement: "Theme is life itself, as manifested in our stories, as seen through our characters, and as experienced through our plots...Theme is how you touch your readers." So there's something of ME in the story to impart to the reader. Not just my character, my plot, my voice and style. It's got my viewpoint. My values. Me.

Heady stuff. Stay tuned for more exciting revelations into the mystery of Theme.

-Sonja

Stalking Susan Review

I'm heading off for a one-week vacation today, so I need some quality reading material to take along. Somewhere on the net, I found a review by the Chicago Tribune that said, "Readers who enjoy Janet Evanovich will soon be stalking Julie Kramer." That sounded intriguing to me. I like Janet Evanovich, especially her outrageously funny Stephanie Plum series. So I went on-line to my local library, found the Julie Kramer books, and checked them all out.

Stalking Susan is the first book of the series. I jumped in fully expecting to find laugh-out-loud antics and witty dialogue. Um, not so. I guess the Evanovich novels weren't Stephanie Plum stories but rather Alex Barnaby.

I was disappointed that the Kramer novel wasn't funny. But that's where the disappointment ended. Stalking Susan was a great story. It started with Riley Spartz, a TV reporter in a major story slump. Her retired cop friend, Garnett, passed her a tip on a couple of cold cases he was never able to solve. They involved women named Susan who were raped and strangled on November 19th, one in 1991 and the other in 1992.
As a plot devise, I found this scenario engaging. Immediately, I was pulled into the investigation, hoping Riley would be able to find enough information to televise a story about it. Then, if all went well, the local police would re-open the cases and solve them. I won't give away the ending, but nothing went as planned for Riley, and her life was endangered several times (as you'd expect).

I thoroughly enjoyed Stalking Susan and have the next three books packed for my trip. If you like a good mystery, check them out.

-Sonja

Paranormal Steampunk Fun

This week I'm reading the Alexia Tarabotti series by Gail Carriger. They are so much fun! Vampires, werewolves, parasols, teapots, dirigibles... what's not to love?

The books are set in Victorian London (1873), where werewolves and vampires co-exist in harmony with humans. In fact, the Queen employs one of each as advisors. Werewolves serve in the army as fighters. Vampires are tendsetters in fashion and style. Steam engines power such wonders as ascension rooms (elevators), ornithopters (helicopters), and aethographors (similar to a telegraph). Tea is always served on time.

What stands out most are the characters. You have to love Miss Ivy Hisselpenny, with her gift of engaging in mindless chatter and her love of hideous hats. Or Lord Akeldama, the vampire fop with a love of outlandish clothes, a penchant for spying, and the uncanny ability to come up with silly terms of endearment on the fly, like squash blossom and dipped biscuit. Mrs. Loontwill is prone to wearing yellow and fits of hysteria. Lord Maccon is a large, bumbling werewolf who hates wearing a cravat and sings opera, poorly, in the bathtub.

It's the protagonist, Alexia Tarabotti, who really sticks with you. She's soulless, so at her touch, supernatural folks lose their supernatural state. She's the embodiment of practicality. She finds death threats to be trifling inconveniences, and adores treacle tarts. She's a spinster with a father who's both Italian and dead. She's eccentric, pragmatic, and wants to be "useful" in a society where women of high standing are supposed to be married and expert shoppers. It's her desire to be useful and her knack for attracting trouble that lead her on wonderful adventures against mad scientists, awkward curses, pesto-serving Templars, and plots against the queen.

If you love witty dialogue, laugh-out-loud antics, and a rich fantasy world full of supernatural wonders and romance, then you'll love this series. A word of warning, the first book has a romantic element and contains quite a bit of canoodling. If sex scenes annoy you, skip the last chapter of the first book. The remaining romantic scenes are amusing and mostly tasteful.

-Sonja

To Outline or Not To Outline

From what I've read, there are two kinds of writers: those who outline (outliners) and those who don't (seat-of-the-panters). I'm an outliner. I've tried writing without one, but my work tends to drift off in strange directions, then I've got to delete a ton of it, get back on track, and waste lots of writing hours going nowhere. So I've learned my lesson. I think through the story, get the basic direction written down, then dive in.

I have a feeling I've gone off the deep end this time. My newest work-in-progress is so thoroughly outlined, it's almost kind of boring when I sit down to write it out dramatically. There are no surprises--at least, there aren't at this point, and I'm 12,000 words into it. Yeah, it comes out really fast, but there's no mystery here. I don't find myself surprised by a turn of events, or thrilled when a character does something unpredictable and fun. I know I'm in charge of all these things, so there really shouldn't be any mystery or surprise or thrill... and yet, I remember, in other works, when something unexpected showed up and knocked the socks--er, flippers--off my feet. I kind of miss those moments.
How about you, fellow writers? Have you ever over-outlined and sucked all the joy out of the writing? If so, how'd you get the magic back without sacrificing the entire work?

-Sonja

Stage Three Melt-Down

In my last post, I talked about the 5 Stage Writing Cycle, casually mentioned by Meg Gardiner at The Kill Zone a couple of days ago. Yesterday, I sat down at my computer, opened up my Work In Progress (WIP), and slid into Stage Three almost immediately.

For those who didn't read the last post, or did but don't want to go back and re-read it, Stage Three is the Panic stage, or what I like to call the It's-All-Drivel stage. This is when you read what you've already written, decide it's pure drivel, and are tempted to delete everything that comes after the title page. There are days when even my title page is in danger.

Thankfully, a wise sage once told me the secret to dealing with this problem. Unfortunately, I can't remember who that wise sage was. (James Scott Bell? Randy Ingermanson? Donald Maass? Could be.) Fortunately, I do remember the advice! It's this simple: 

When you enter a Stage Three Melt-Down, don't delete anything. Yup, that's right. Leave all the drivel alone. Ignore it. Instead, go to the end of the document, get a new blank page on the screen, and add new words. It doesn't matter if the new words are drivel, also. The point is to get new words onto the page. Later, when you've moved beyond Stage Three, you can go back and edit the existing stuff to make it better. If you delete it all while in the midst of the panic, you won't have any words left to edit.

I know it's simplistic, but it works wonders. All my previous drivel--uh, words--are still in the WIP, ready to be edited. Probably today, since I find myself back in Stage Two, which is Delusions of Grandeur. It's a nice place to exist, if you can get there.

For what it's worth.

-Sonja

Five-Stage Writing Cycle

Today over at The Kill Zone, writer Meg Gardiner is the guest blogger. One sentence jumped off the blog and got me laughing, so I have to share with you.
She casually mentioned the 5 stage writing cycle. I'd never heard of this before. I've heard of the 5 stages of grief (denial/isolation, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance), but not the writing cycle. Then she listed them:

1) excitement
2) delusions of grandeur
3) panic
4) compulsive eating
5) deliverance

This delighted me so much because it's so true! For me, number four is replaced with compulsive computer gaming (Sid Meier's Civ 4), but everything else is right on. I've experienced all these stages through every novel I've written, and I somehow never skip a step.

Do these ring true for you, too?

-Sonja

A Problem with Series

(Note: I tried posting this last Monday, and it never appeared. So I'm re-posting it today. I apologize to my three loyal readers who looked for a post on Monday and were sorely disappointed. Now back to the regularly scheduled program.)

I just finished reading the second book of a series. In an effort to not offend the author or his fans, I won't mention his name, but I had a major problem with the ending of the second book. I'd like to preface this comment with the fact that I enjoyed the first book quite a bit. It went in a strange direction, but it worked for me, mostly because I loved the protagonist. So when I got book two from the library, I was excited to see what new adventures awaited this fabulous heroine. The second book was just as exciting as the first. The heroine was still lovable. The obstacles thrown in her path were deliciously horrific.

Then I got to the end. It was unbelievable. Unsatisfying. Illogical. And incredibly confusing. I closed the book and wondered what on earth had happened. I wasn't even sure she came out on top. Did she get what she wanted? Did she save the world? Did she actually accomplish something worthwhile?

I'm going to give this author another chance and read book three. But it got me thinking about my own novels within a series. Did I play fair with the reader? Are the endings satisfactory and understandable? Or do they leave the reader confused and frustrated?

Maybe the only way to know for certain is to ask my beta readers, as I'm entirely too close to my own novels. They work, in my mind, as I'm sure the ending in book two worked for this other author.
Does anyone out there have another solution to this problem?

-Sonja

Step Seven: New Quilibrium

I'm at the end of John Truby's seven steps to creating a great story structure, as detailed in his book, THE ANATOMY OF STORY. Step seven is New Equilibrium.

Everything returns to normal. All desire is gone. The hero got what he wanted (or, in a tragedy, failed miserably). There's one difference: the hero has changed, a fundamental and permanent change. Sometimes that change is for the positive and he walks away a better man. Sometimes that change is negative and he realizes that he is incapable of having a self-revelation. In this case, he falls or is destroyed.

In DIE HARD, John has defeated the criminals, saved his wife, and reaffirmed their love. In SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, Clarice has brought Buffalo Bill to justice, has become an excellent FBI agent, and has conquered her nightmares. In VERTIGO, Scottie drags the woman he loves to the top of a tower to get her to confess to murder, then watches in horror as she accidentally falls to her death.

This step is clear, and I doubt you've left it out of your POV, but go check, anyway.

-Sonja

Step Six: Self-Revelation

John Truby's book, THE ANATOMY OF STORY, offers seven steps to creating a great hero for a great story structure. Step six is Self-Revelation.

Step five, covered in the last post, was Battle. "The battle is an intense and painful experience for the hero," Truby says. And this battle causes the hero to have a revelation about who he is. In a psychological self-revelation, the hero sees himself honestly for the first time. This stripping away of the old facade is a painful and courageous act, the most courageous thing the hero has done in the entire story.

In BIG, John realizes he has to leave his girlfriend and his life at the toy company to go back to being a kid if he is to have a successful life as an adult. In CASABLANCA, Ricks sheds his cynicism, regains his idealism, and sacrifices his lover to become a freedom fighter.
If your hero has a moral need (which he should), his self-revelation should be moral as well. He doesn't just see himself in a new light; he has an insight about the proper way to act toward others. He realizes he's been wrong, that he's hurt others, and that he must change. Then he proves he has changed by taking new moral action.

In TOOTSIE, Michael realizes he's been a scoundrel and apologizes to the woman he loves. Note that he says it in a clever and comical manner to avoid sermonizing.
Self-revelation is most closely connected to need. Need is the beginning of the hero's character change, and self-revelation is the end-point of that change. Need marks his immaturity, what he's missing, what is holding him back. Self-revelation is the moment when he's grown as a human being. It's what he's learned, what allows him to be a better man.

This is a tough step to pull off without sounding preachy. Instead of having your hero say out loud what new thing he's learned, or what new insight he has into himself, SHOW him acting on this new-found knowledge.
-Sonja

Step Five: Battle

I'm still digging all the good stuff out of John Truby's book, THE ANATOMY OF STORY, 22 Steps to Becoming a Master Storyteller. The 22 steps mentioned in the subtitle have to do with building plot. But Truby begins the book by offering seven of those 22 steps that building a great story structure.

Step five is Battle. Throughout the middle of the story, the hero and his opponent engage in several confrontations as they each try to reach the goal. The conflict escalates toward a Final Battle, which finally determines who wins the goal. This final battle may be a conflict with violence or a conflict with words.

In THE ODYSSEY, Odysseus slays the suitors who have tormented his wife and destroyed his home. In CHINATOWN, a cop kills Evelyn, and Noah gets away with Evelyn's daughter while Jake walks off in despair. In THE VERDICT, Frank defeats opposing counsel by using brilliant lawyering and persuasive words in the courtroom.

This step is fairly self-explanatory, so I won't try to offer a strategy for making this work. If you have no final battle in your story, you need one.

-Sonja

Step Four: Plan

THE ANATOMY OF STORY, by John Truby, contains seven steps to building a great story structure. Step four is the Plan.

The plan is the guidelines or strategies the hero will use to overcome his opponent and reach the goal. It's organically linked to both desire and the opponent. Sometimes it's vague, and the hero muddles through it. Sometimes it's so complex, the hero has to write it down (thus sharing it with the reader). Without the plan, there's no moving forward in the story.

HAMLET'S desire is to bring about justice for his father's murder. His opponent is the current king, who happens to be the murderer. Hamlet's plan is to put on a play that mimics the murder of his father by the current king. He will then prove the king's guilt by the king's reaction to the play.

In THE GODFATHER, Michael's desire is to protect his family from other mafia crime families. His opponents are the other crime families who'd like to control crime in New York. Michael's first plan is to kill Sollozzo. His second plan is to kill the heads of the other mafia families in a single strike.

This step is easy enough to understand, so there's no point in offering a technique for achieving it. Just go put a plan in your story.

-Sonja

Step Three: Opponent

John Truby's THE ANATOMY OF STORY outlines seven key steps to creating a master story. Step three is Opponent.

The opponent, or antagonist, is not the character who looks evil, sounds evil, and does evil things. The opponent actually functions as a structural element in a good story. "A true opponent not only wants to prevent the hero from achieving his desire but is competing with the hero for the same goal." The opponent is organically linked to the hero's desire. When they compete for the same goal, they are forced into direct conflict over and over throughout the story. If they have two separate goals, then they can each achieve their own goal without coming into conflict, and there's no story.

Sometimes it's hard to see how the hero and opponent are competing for the same goal. For example, in detective stories, it seems like the detective is trying to catch the killer, and the killer is trying to get away with his crime. But really they are fighting over which version of reality everyone will believe. (This concept was new to me when I read it, and it took a while for that to sink in.)

To create an opponent who wants the same goal as the hero, start with the hero's specific goal. Whoever wants to keep him from getting it is the opponent.

In STAR WARS, Luke's opponent is Darth Vader. They are fighting over who will control the universe. Vader represents the Empire while Luke represents the forces of good, comprised of the Jedi Knights and the democratic Republic.

In THE GODFATHER, Michael's opponent is Barzini, who wants to bring down the Corleone family. Michael and Barzini compete over the survival of the Corleone family and who will control crime in New York.

Once you've identified your hero and his opponent, it's time to move onto step four. I'll look at it in the next post.

-Sonja

Step Two: Desire

John Truby, in his book THE ANATOMY OF STORY, offers seven steps to building a great story structure. The second step is Desire.

Desire is what your hero wants. It's the driving force of the story. It's what sucks the reader in and makes him hang on with fingers and toes and teeth. Desire is intimately connected to need. "In most stories," Truby says, "when the hero accomplishes his goal, he also fulfills his need."
Here's a simple example. A lion is hungry (physical need). He sees a young antelope within the herd and wants to eat it (desire). If he can catch the antelope, he won't be hungry anymore (need fulfilled).

Don't confuse need and desire. Need has to do with overcoming a weakness within the hero. He is paralyzed somehow at the beginning of the story by this weakness. Desire is a goal outside the hero. Once he identifies his desire, his goal, he takes action to reach that goal.

Need and desire also have different functions in the story. Need lets the reader see how the hero must change to become a better person and live a better life. It is hidden, under the surface, not identified by the hero as a flaw. Desire gives the reader something to want along with the hero. It's on the surface.
In SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, Hero John Miller's need is to do his duty in spite of his fear (this includes both psychological and moral needs). His desire is to find Private Ryan and bring him back alive.

In THE VERDICT, the hero must regain his self-respect (psychological) and learn to act with justice toward others (moral). His desire is to win the case.

In the next post I'll discuss Truby's third step, Opponent

-Sonja