Letters from the Scriptorium

So, it's been about a week and a half since the Summer Quarter ended for me. And god has the break been dragging. I know that as soon as I get back into classes, I'm going to wish that the break went on longer, but at this point, I'm lucky if I get anything done in a day besides lunch.

Good news is that one of my Betas got back to me. A younger writer on the YWS, she had some awesome advice and insights. And she loved it - which always makes me feel good, especially since she's closer to the Target Audience than I am currently.

Now, if only I could actually get on those edits...

I just noticed the writer's block today is on Neuromancer, cyberpunk masterpiece that I need to read at some point. It happens to factor into what I've been thinking about lately, which is the punk subgenres, fantasy, and sci-fi.

I guess, I've been thinking about what the -punk suffix actually means. On the surface, with the major punk genres, it appears to be a suffix denoting advanced technology from traditionally primative power sources, as with Steampunk and Clockpunk. However, since punk has become more popular, the suffix has been attached to everything from Elves to Cattle.

The reason I'm thinking about this is because my main world building project tends towards punk - or I would like it to. My MG, the Abby Crowe series, has some Steampunk elements, most notably that the setting is the 1890s, without being completely historically accurate.

Oh, and the magic.

But with the world building I've been doing lately, I've been taking into consideration the entire history and future of Abigail's world, looking at the stories that arise. In particular there is one story I'd like to write that takes place during the Norman Invasion of Britain. But High Medieval Fantasy is so... done. Additionally, the future of the world introduces some interesting possibilities, including Cyberpunk magic - if that isn't an oxymoron.

So, my question to you today, is what constitutes punk? Can you have fantasy cyberpunk? Space Opera-punk? Medievalpunk? What would such settings look and feel like? Is punk really more about the characters than the setting, or is it simply an over-all aesthetic? I'd love to pick some brains about this.

For some reason, it seems like I've lost all urge to read lately. Usually I'm racing through one or two books and several amateur pieces by real-life or online friends, but in the past few days, I can't seem to devote myself to the act of reading.

I don't know what it is.

I'm in the middle of Inkheart, and today I tried to start City of Ashes, but nothing seems to be sticking. I also started the Eyre Affair a few weeks back (maybe even a month back, now) and couldn't finish that either. It's not that I don't like the books - well, City of Ashes is rather iffy, but I was wholly in love with Inkheart and Jasper Fforde - but I can't just sit down and read, and any time I do, I lose interest.

Maybe it's the fact that I feel like I'm in limbo, waiting for my Betas to get back to me. Maybe it's because I have absolutely nothing to do, so reading feels like more of a chore than an escape. And maybe it's just because my concentration's shot. Whatever it is, I hope it goes away soon.

Muh.

So I've been going over my world building notes, and I've realized that I have very little written down for the workings of my main governmental body. I call it a government, but it's more like a secret society, though I think it would work similarly to an aristocratic monarchy: secret dealings between families, arranged political marriages, etc. etc.

But while most leaders of monarchies, especially aristocratic ones, are chosen by nothing more than selective (and at times, not so selective) breeding, I wanted my Court to have more of an element of, if not democracy, then meritocracy - rule by the most qualified. So I'm examining how that would work at the moment, and I think the way I'm going to do it is succession by appointment rather than birth; that is, the current leader chooses her successor, who is not always necessarily her first born, or even a member of her House.

'Course, checks and balances and all that jazz is still up in the air: I think I'll have to write a fair bit about it before I get a real feel for how everything works.

Anyways, what do you think? Is a leader choosing the next to ascend the throne a viable method of succession? What potential problems could arise in such a system?

"He's one of my best villains. How could I kill him off?"
~Fenoglio, Inkheart

I guess I've been thinking about villains lately, mostly because work on my MG has stalled, and so I've started going back to re-examine my characters. And of course, villains are always so much more interesting than heroes... so there you go. There are some three or so characters in the entirety of the story who could be classified as villains - all of them working against each other even as they create more trouble for my MC. Arguably, one of them isn't really a villain, but a trickster character. However, I think since he features as the main antagonist throughout one of the books, he counts.

Anyways, I've been thinking about what makes a really good villain. Capricorn and Basta in Inkheart certainly qualify - though they're a bit archetypal, with a good amount of Kick the Dog moments. Still, extremely unsympathetic, villainous villains can work well, depending on the work - and Funke knows her stuff.

But most people would argue that sympathetic villains are best. Oddly enough, we like to relate to our antagonists, maybe out of some twisted form of vicarious living, or maybe just because humans as a race have to have reasons for everything. After all, when we ask "why'd he kick the dog?" we'd like to have a better answer than: "Just 'cause." It all relates back to motivation and character building. A villain who's evil just for the sake of being evil is rather flat - but just adding in some tragic history isn't going to make a flat character any more 3d.

Which is why I never liked Voldemort. Okay, so your muggle father treated your mum like dirt: that doesn't explain why you like torturing small animals as an eleven-year-old. And throughout the entire series, he keeps on making the same mistakes, never learning from them. I don't know if that's supposed to be characterization or if it's just lazy writing. But either way, Voldemort never really made an impression on me as a Great Villain.

So, what is it that makes a Great Villain? Is it motivation? Evilness? Intelligence? Or just general Badassery?

I should be working on my writing projects right now. Instead, I'm here on LJ talking to a non-existent audience...

Part of the problem is that I have so many projects right now I'm not really sure what to work on. Aside from my main concern (that is: my nearly-finished MG Novel), I've also got NaNoWriMo to think about, as well as several other side projects that start to pester me every now and then. I keep telling myself to stay focused on my MG, but with all the problems I've been running into finishing it, I'm not sure that that's a reasonable expectation.

First of all, there's the problem of the ending. Re-reading it and thinking about what I want to do with it, I've realized the climax needs a little tweaking, and that the resolution needs to be rewritten all together. However, while I know, now, what exactly I want to do, the problem that keeps coming up is how I'm going to do it. There's little doubt in my mind that talking it over with someone and hashing out some ideas would get the job done, but that leads into my second problem:

My betas suck.

Don't get me wrong, they're all good people. Some of them are my closest friends. But as editors? It's not that they're bad; it's just that some of them don't have the time they thought they did, or the commitment they expressed at first, or the experience they need to really be helpful.

But I'm talking to a few other people now. In particular, I've joined the Young Writer's Society, which looks like a wonderful community for teenage and young adult writers. I'm talking to one or two people on there now about betaing the manuscript. I might also revisit the QueryTracker community (great resource for any of you at the querying stage!), and my one friend who has actually finished reading the novel said that he'd try working on it with me in a few days.

It's just that all that takes time, and I'm impatient.

In the meanwhile, I should be working on another project. Instead, I'm here on LJ talking to a non-existant audience...

Just a short note for anyone wondering. I don't know how other stores did with the Brisingr release, but our store's release party was a complete disappointment. I didn't even get to make anyone cry.

There were maybe thirty people there, definitely no more than fifty. We had a small trivia session, and at midnight, the books got handed out in about two minutes. Part of it was probably the gas crisis going on down here right now. $4.19 a gallon will keep some people from even looking at their cars.

Can't say I'm particularly upset at it, but it would've been nice to have something to do for three hours besides dust the aisles.

There are many advantages to working at a bookstore. The environment beats any other part-time job (no grease!); your coworkers tend to be intelligent and literate to the greatest degree; and of course, when all is said and done, you're spending your day surrounded by books, books, and more books.

It's exhilarating.

However, depending on where you work, there can be a slew of unpleasantness as well. At least for me, and the bookstore I work at, corporate management ruins what would otherwise be a wonderful job. Aside from the fact that they put more emphasis on selling the magazines than they do on selling the books, aside from the fact that they pile our store with more and more un-book-related crap, aside from all that, the fact that we're situated in the boondocks of the Bible belt leads to some... interesting customer interactions.

Customer: Did Anne Frank write any other novels?

Me: Errr....

As one of my coworkers put it: "We're not exactly a literate bookstore."

Of course, I'm not really complaining, or I wouldn't be, if I weren't working the Brisingr release party this Friday. But staying up until two in the morning to promote an author that I consider a complete hack...? Not my idea of fun. I won't start ranting about Paolini and Eragon here, but suffice to say, I am not excited. I'm more than a little worried that I'm going to end up making some child cry.

Ah well, they'll get over it.

Sucks.

It is currently midnight - not at all late by most standards, but rather alarming (at least to me) when I think of how early I have to get up. So I'm counting down the minutes, trying to think of things to do, and making sure my cat doesn't eat my computer screen. After all, they say if you can't sleep, you might as well get up and do things; tires you out, and keeps you from making a bad thing worse.

And doing things is definitely not the problem - I've got tons of work ready and waiting, correspondence, writing, homework and what not. What worries me is what might come out of these fingers if I let myself run on too late. Mind you, I've stayed up until seven in the morning, just letting out all the creative energies that decide to bubble up right when I least need them - but of course, that was when I didn't have school to worry about. It's the oddest thing, how inspiration, or at least, the urge to write/draw/create always seems to strike me in the middle of the night.

I almost look forward to it.

Insomnia sucks. And yet, I never regret staying up. It's always... refreshing, in a way similar to, yet completely different from sleep. The night is full of mystery and possibility, and by five in the morning, I feel like I can do anything, go anywhere - no matter how far, how impossible it might seem in the daylight. Of course, crashing is never fun, but spending an entire day drifting in and out of sleep isn't so bad, if you don't have any urgent responsibilities.

Besides, watching the sunrise is a nice perk.