Archive for the ‘Writing’ Category
New Guest Blog about Parallel Universes and the Elfyverse is Up
Folks, I have a new guest blog up at Stephanie Osborn’s blog, Comet Tales. It’s about parallel universes, and why I used this particular theory in AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE.
“But Barb,” I can hear you saying. “Why did you write this particular guest blog? Haven’t parallel universes been done to death in SF&F literature? What could you possibly say that’s new about that hoary old subject?”
Well, parallel universes have been used many times in science fiction. But they’ve only rarely been used in straight fantasy. And definitely not like this.
Here’s a bit from my guest blog that explains why I used parallel universes in this particular way:
I figured it’s much easier to have one world that’s split via the parallel universe theory than it is to send someone somewhere else where nothing is familiar whatsoever. I liked the idea that the supposedly familiar could also be intensely strange – as the Elfys, at first, know very little about us, the Humans, and we definitely know even less about them. And I really liked the idea that a magical being like a Dark Elf – that is, a being committed to violence and darkness and death for its own sake – would “pass” as Human because we’ve forgotten that Dark Elfs exist.
Please do take a gander at my guest blog over at Stephanie’s site, as I think you might find it interesting. Because really, very few fantasy novelists have used the parallel universe theory straight-up . . . and perhaps me using it gives you an idea just how unique AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE is compared to other fantasy novels.
(Plus, it’s funny. Have I mentioned that yet?)
Anyway, this guest blog explains why I decided to use the parallel universe theory — something you rarely see in fantasy — to good effect in AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE. I truly hope you will enjoy it.
Kendall and Kylie Jenner “Write” a Book — My Rant
Folks, I just finished reading two sample chapters from REBELS: CITY OF INDRA: The Story of Lex and Livia, a book purportedly written by Kendall and Kylie Jenner. (Yes, they’re the sisters of Kim, Khloe, and Kourtney Kardashian.)
Here’s my capsule review: It’s dreadful. (Take a look at these one-star reviews if you don’t believe me.)
Why?
There’s no plot. There’s nothing in the way of characterization. And the Jenner sisters didn’t even write it.
The only good thing about REBELS: CITY OF INDRA: The Story of Lex and Livia (and yes, it has all of those colons) is this: Two ghostwriters actually got paid to write this garbage.
As a writer of YA fiction (you may have heard of my novel, AN ELFY ON THE LOOSE, if you’ve ever been to my blog before), I am appalled that this pitiful excuse for a book is currently sitting at #353 paid in the Amazon store.
And the only reason it appears to be there is this: The Jenner sisters are the young half-sisters of Kim Kardashian, reality starlet. So when they said, “Hey, we want to write a book,” they immediately got a book contract.
Then, apparently, after they realized how hard writing is, they quite sensibly hired ghost writers — which actually makes good business sense, but doesn’t show much on the creative side of the ledger for either of the Jenner sisters.
And now, they’re making money hand over fist despite the many negative reviews, merely because of name recognition.
It’s enough to make me, a barely known author, cry.
What can you do to combat this sort of nonsense? It’s blindingly simple: read something else.
“But Barb!” you yell. “I don’t know what to read! Help me!” (With or without exclamation points, granted.)
Look. I know many writers, and have reviewed many, many, many better books than this one. Here are just a few in the YA category that I recommend, and why:
Stephanie Osborn’s StarSong is a fable about a young, spoiled girl who realizes she needs to grow up and start doing things for herself before she finds the man of her dreams. This is an excellent novella about a spiritual awakening and a nifty coming-of-age tale, all in one. It was written for pre-teens, but anyone eight or above should enjoy this fun little story of loss, romance and redemption.
Chris Nuttall’s latest, LESSONS IN ETIQUETTE, is the second story about Emily, a teenage girl from our world who’s been transported to a quasi-medieval world where she can do magic and is important…but is important as much for the technical innovations she introduces into this new world (the printing press, Arabic numbers, double-entry bookkeeping, etc.) as she is for her own prodigious magical gifts. It’s a well-paced, well-written book that will keep you turning the pages, and is possibly Chris’s best book to date.
Katharine Eliska Kimbriel’s NIGHT CALLS is the story of Alfreda Sorensson, who is a frontier girl with magic. Again, she does for herself, thank you, and spends her time productively by learning about herself and the world around her. This is one of the best books for teenage girls I’ve ever read.
Jason Cordova’s CORRUPTOR is about Tori, a teenager trapped in a virtual reality game environment. Tori’s ex-boyfriend causes trouble, while Tori’s widowed father tries to get her out of the simulation. It’s a fun, fast read with a lot of real-world implications.
Sarah A. Hoyt’s DARKSHIP THIEVES is about Athena, a girl on the cusp of adulthood who must find herself, fast. Her father is against her, so she flees as far away as she can and finds a whole different place than she’d ever imagined…she falls in love and marries, yes, but she does so on her terms and by showing how competent and intelligent she is at every turn.
Mercedes Lackey and Rosemary Edghill’s neo-Arthurian Shadow Grail series (LEGACIES, CONSPIRACIES, SACRIFICES and VICTORIES) features Spirit White, who loses her parents in an accident and only then finds out she has magic. But what type, and why? (And was it really an accident?) So she first has to find herself, learn her talents, and then save the world…
Folks, those are just a few of the many excellent books out there in the YA and/or pre-teen category. These are all writers who work hard at their craft, write excellent stories that make sense, with characters you will appreciate, and came up with plausible worlds in the bargain. I highly recommend all of these stories, and hope you will support these writers — real writers working really hard to give you really fine stories with real craftsmanship.
(Really.)
So, in short: Please do not support this newest effort by the Jenner sisters. They don’t need the money. They didn’t do the work. And they don’t deserve your patronage thereby.
But many other real writers do.
——–
Edited to add: I’ve started a Twitter campaign called #SupportARealWriter to get the word out about real writers who use real craftsmanship to create good, solid, honest books — really. If you see #SupportARealWriter at the end of something, please support that writer and let people know their books are out, available, and are much, much better than the above book with the Jenner sisters’ name on it.
Attending Digicon 2014, Presenting Three Workshops
Folks, over the next three days (May 29-31, 2014), I will be attending Digicon 2014, a special event put on by SavvyAuthors.com. This is an important online writer’s convention, and I’m proud to be a part of it.
But I’m not just attending Digicon14. I am also presenting three workshops, which are:
- “When Your Crystal Ball Doesn’t Work — How to Fix Your Foreshadowing”
- “Procrastination Sedation — Or How to Quit Wasting Time on Social Media and Write”
- “Manuscripts Gone Wrong, or, How to Drive Your Editor Crazy Without Even Trying”
Now, why did I pick these particular topics?
Foreshadowing is one of the trickiest things for any writer to do. Even experienced writers can be confused by foreshadowing. So I tried to give some common-sense general tips. (I’m also hoping people will chime in with their own examples, so we can be a bit interactive.)
As for the second, time-management is essential for writers. Without it, we are doomed.
And as for the third? Well, I’m an editor. I’ve seen many mistakes time and time again. These mistakes can be overcome, but first, writers have to be made aware of them . . . it’s the same old adage as applies to anything else: You cannot fix a problem if you don’t first know it’s a problem.
If you, too, would like to be a part of Digicon14, it’s not too late for you to sign up here.
Hope to see you there.
Just Reviewed Stephanie Osborn’s “Endings and Beginnings” at SBR
Folks, I’m glad to pass along a teensy bit of good news tonight, as I was able to review Stephanie Osborn’s THE CASE OF THE COSMOLOGICAL KILLER: ENDINGS AND BEGINNINGS (otherwise known as book four of her Displaced Detective series featuring Sherlock Holmes as brought to the modern-day via the World of Myth hypothesis) tonight over at Shiny Book Review (SBR).
Why?
Well, sometimes it’s refreshing to read a romance, especially when it’s about two unabashedly smart, talented, thoughtful individuals. Much less two romances.
You see, there’s a romance going on between our universe’s Sherlock and Skye Chadwick-Holmes (Skye being the hyperspatial physicist who brought Sherlock to our world in the first place, natch). They’ve recently married, are on their honeymoon, and are also investigating a crime (as that’s what they do).
But the other romance between the secondary universe’s other-Sherlock and other-Holmes isn’t going nearly so well.
And our Sherlock and Skye know this and want to fix things between their counterparts. Which is something you see all the time in romance, but you only rarely see in science fiction . . . but as well as this works, I wish we saw more of it.
To see a couple in deep distress (in this case, other-Sherlock and other-Skye) figure out a way to rectify their distress and fix their relationship is the hallmark of a great romance. Which is why I’m urging you to go read Stephanie Osborn’s ENDINGS AND BEGINNINGS just as soon as you can if you love Sherlock Holmes (as brought to the modern-day), if you love intelligent romances, and/or you love intelligent science right along with your intelligent romance.
You won’t regret it.
Some Thoughts on Editing UK and American Spellings
Folks, after reading Stephanie Osborn’s latest guest blog about writing both British and American spellings — not to mention euphemisms and sayings — I started to think.
You see, I’ve edited for a number of non-Americans. Whether these have been Canadians, New Zealanders, Australians, or folks from the United Kingdom, I’ve given them the same advice I give anyone else.
So what changes when I edit for someone who isn’t from the United States? Mostly, it’s the spelling . . . but as Stephanie cogently pointed out, some of the sayings are dissimilar also.
And yes, that can be complicated, especially if I’ve never come across the euphemism before despite all of my reading and other experience.
So what do you do then, as an editor?
My job, as an editor, is to help the client, regardless of where he or she comes from. So if I don’t understand what the client is saying, I have to ask him — and I am not shy about doing so, either.
(Why I should be is possibly fodder for another blog entirely. But as always, I digress.)
Sure, it looks odd for me as an American who grew up with American spelling to see behavior spelled behaviour — or color as colour, either — though some UK-derived spellings aren’t so odd or outré.
Consider, please, that most people don’t even bat an eye when the word “theatre” is spelled with -re rather than the usual American spelling, theater. And most American writers use dialogue with the -ue rather than the technically preferred and American spelling of dialog, which drops the -ue entirely, right along with the word prologue.
Also, it’s not unknown to see an American spell the word marvellous with two l’s — even though that’s technically the British spelling — rather than marvelous with only one l.
Anyway, spelling differences aside, the advice an editor gives doesn’t tend to change very much. But you do have to make a note of it when you’re working with someone who isn’t from the United States and is writing for a world market as opposed to the U.S. market.
That aside, as a reader and reviewer, I find it refreshing to see Stephanie Osborn using British spelling in Sherlock Holmes’ point of view, while her American hyperspatial physicist, Skye Chadwick-Holmes, the wife of Sherlock, quite rightly uses the American spelling she grew up with.
Because I do think it adds to the narrative to do it that way — and, perhaps ironically, points out that the differences between men and women are not always merely cosmetic.
——–
Quick reviewing update: I hope to have a review of LINCOLN’S BOYS up over at Shiny Book Review (SBR) by tomorrow evening. Stephanie Osborn’s fourth book in her Displaced Detective series, ENDINGS AND BEGINNINGS, is tentatively scheduled for this Saturday, as what could be a better time to discuss the actual wedding of Sherlock and Skye than Romance Saturday at SBR?
And if you live in Racine and want to see a good symphonic band concert, I urge you to come out to Case High School on Thursday night to see the Racine Concert Band. I’m playing the alto saxophone in this concert, so if you know me, be sure to give me a discreet wave. (I’d say “give me a yell,” but that would be quite rude under the circumstances.)
A Guest Blog from Stephanie Osborn: The Differences in Writing British and American English (and How to Write Both)
Folks, Stephanie Osborn is no stranger to the Elfyverse (or my blog, either, though sometimes they seem to be one and the same). She’s previously written a few guest blogs (here and here), and as her latest book in her popular Displaced Detective series featuring Sherlock Holmes and his wife, hyperspatial physicist Skye Chadwick, has finally arrived — this being A CASE OF SPONTANTEOUS COMBUSTION, it seemed like a good time for Stephanie to write another one.
So without further ado, please welcome writer extraordinaire Stephanie Osborn back to the Elfyverse!
******
A note from Stephanie Osborn: It is my great pleasure to make another guest appearance in the Elfyverse. Barb is an amazing writer and editor, and I am so happy to have made her acquaintance through her review of several of my novels; she has become a special friend. We’ve been able to help lift each other up at times when things were down, and that’s so much better than trying to haul oneself up by one’s own bootstraps! I hope you enjoy my little cameo.
American English and British English, and Learning to Write Both
By Stephanie Osborn
I’m sure you’ve all seen it.
We in America would say, “I don’t recognize this caller ID on my cellphone; I thought this app specialized in emphasizing identification. Could you wake me up at seven in the morning? Everything has been taken care of, but I have to run over and see Mom before the announcement is publicly known.”
But a Brit would say the same thing like this: “I don’t recognise this caller ID on my mobile; I thought this app specialised in emphasising identification. Would you knock me up at seven in the morning? It’s all sorted, but I have to pop over and see me Mum before the announcement is publically known.”
It’s the difference between the American version of English, and the British version of the same language. Sometimes people who travel back and forth between the two countries — the US and the UK — have been known to remark, “We speak the same language, but we don’t.”
And the difference encompasses terminology, slang, and even spelling.
Did you know that J.K. Rowling was made to change the name of the very first book in the Harry Potter series before it could be published in the USA? The original title, the title you’ll find on bookstore shelves in London, is Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone. But publishers felt that Americans might not recognize the alchemical reference, and so it was changed to Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. And you may, or may not, be familiar with the use of “trainers” to mean athletic shoes, or “jumper” to refer to a pullover sweater. Cell phones are “mobiles” and refrigerators, regardless of brand, are “Frigidaires.” (I suppose this is analogous to our referring to all disposable facial tissues as “Kleenex” and cotton swabs as “Q-Tips.”)
Americans may call it a plow, but Britons call it a plough — that was even a major clue that Holmes found in one of the original adventures, denoting the suspect wasn’t British as he claimed. There is, it seems, and has been for something like a century and a half at the least, a tendency for Americans to eliminate so-called silent letters and spell more phonetically than our British counterparts. But at least Sir Arthur Conan Doyle only had to write in one version thereof.
When I started writing the Displaced Detective series, which has been described as, “Sherlock Holmes meets The X-Files,” I made a deliberate decision: If the speaker was American, dialogue (and later, thoughts and even scenes from that character’s point of view) would be written in American English. If the speaker (thinker, observer) was from the United Kingdom, dialogue etc. would be written in British English. This has held true right down to the book currently being released, A Case of Spontaneous Combustion, book 5 in the series (with at least 3 more in work, and more in the planning stages).
The series itself traces the exploits of Sherlock Holmes — or one version of Holmes, at least — when he is inadvertently yanked from an alternate reality in which he exists in Victorian Europe, into modern, 21st Century America. Because in his particular alternate reality, he and Professor Moriarty were BOTH supposed to die at Reichenbach, if he is returned, he must die. So he wisely opts to stay put and come up to speed on the modern world. Working with Dr. Skye Chadwick, her continuum’s equivalent to Holmes and the Chief Scientist of Project Tesseract (the program responsible for his accidental transition), Holmes ends up being asked to investigate unusual and occasionally outré situations.
In his latest foray, after an entire English village is wiped out in an apparent case of mass spontaneous combustion, London contacts The Holmes Agency to investigate. Holmes goes undercover to find a terror ring. In Colorado, Skye battles raging wildfires and mustangs, believing Holmes has abandoned her. Holmes must discover what caused the horror in Stonegrange and try to stop the terrorists before they unleash their bizarre weapon again, all the while wondering if he still has a home in Colorado.
And the cast of characters includes an American FBI agent, several members of the US military, two entire units of MI-5, and more. All of whom have to be rendered in their appropriate version of English.
Simple, you say? Just set Word to use the British English dictionary.
Right. Except then Skye, Agent Smith, Colonel Jones, and the other Americans would then be speaking Brit.
“So set both dictionaries operational,” you suggest.
Great idea. I’d love to. But Word doesn’t have that option — the two dictionaries would conflict. And even if it could use both, how would it know whether an American or an Englishman were speaking? More, one of those characters — Holmes himself — actually uses a somewhat archaic form of British English, in that he is a man of the Victorian era, and speaks in such fashion. So I am really using three different forms of English.
Well, the end result is simply that I have to make sure I read back through the manuscript very carefully, looking for places where either I’ve slipped up, or autocorrect replaced the British with the American equivalent (which it does every chance it gets). I’m also pleased that my publisher has assigned me a regular editor who is quite familiar with the British version of English, to include the euphemisms, exclamations, and general slang. She’s been amazingly helpful, and I do my best to stay up to speed on the latest version of slang in both the US and the UK.
So what has been the response?
Well, I’ve had one or two Amazon reviews refer to “misspellings,” and there’s one venerated author (of whom I like to refer as one of the “Grand Old Men of Science Fiction”) who is currently reading the first couple of books in the series and is amazed that I even attempted to pull such a thing off, let alone that I’m doing it.
But other than that, it’s rather strange; not one reader has volunteered the observation that I am writing in two different forms of the English language. Yet the sense among fans of the series is that I have captured Doyle’s tone and style, despite the fact that I do not use a first-person Watson narrative, despite the fact that we see what Holmes is thinking, at least to a point.
I believe the reason is because, subconsciously, readers are picking up on the fact that Holmes speaks, thinks, and observes in proper, Victorian, British English. And even when referring to more modern conveniences, maintains a solid British presence. Consistently. Throughout.
And that’s precisely what I intended, from the very beginning.
I love it when a plan comes together.
* * * * *
And that concludes Stephanie Osborn’s latest guest blog! (Insert another hearty round of applause here.) Thank you again, Stephanie . . . as always, I enjoyed your guest blog heartily.
For the rest of you, please do yourselves a favor, and go check out Stephanie’s intelligent novels of Sherlock Holmes as brought to the modern-day by hyperspatial physicist Skye Chadwick — and who later marries him, becoming akin to Dr. Watson in the process. They are truly SF novels, contain solid science and world building and characterization, and yet even with all this somewhat “heavy” subject matter are gripping and full of suspense.
That’s tough to pull off. But if you’re like me, you won’t recognize this in the heat of finding out just how Sherlock and Skye are going to solve the case this time . . .