With The Evolution of Janie done for now (well, except for minor revisions and those nits that keep popping up) I've been working on the sequel, The Reconstruction of Janie. I already have an idea of where the story is going and I even think that my trilogy may be pared down to just the two books. So knowing where I'm going is wonderful, and even having an idea of where it will end is even better. The hard part is where to start.
Due to changes I'd made to Evolution my previous start to the sequel just wasn't going to work. So, I took a stab at an alternate opening, Janie and Marcus facing the council, that way I could recap what happened in the first book. Problem! It then felt more like the next chapter in the book, and like an info dump. Definitely not what I was going for.
I've had an idea that ties very nicely back to the opening chapter of Evolution, but I'm still torn. Where do I draw the line with the recap of info? Having an info dump is just too tiring, not just for me but also for the reader, because really if they wanted to know right away what was happening in the sequel, shouldn't they read the first one? I hate getting a sequel and having to wade through a retelling of everything that happened before, so why would I, as an author, want to do that to my readers?
At this point, I've managed to find a spot to start. What I've written with the Council scene will stay (with a bunch of cuts) and will come after my new Chapter 1. What I had from a year ago will also stay, although I'll need to do a lot of edits and revisions (five chapters of plotline that I'm keeping is too much to toss).
So, knowing where I'm starting is great, right? That's what I thought, then I began to wonder how I will distinguish Reconstruction from Evolution. And really, that's through Janie. The Janie of Evolution, starts off alone and weak, and by the end of the book she's facing her father and mother and has a sense of self-worth. Janie in Reconstruction is stronger and refuses to allow anyone to take away the confidence she's gained. Janie isn't what's giving me the problem now. In my head her voice is right, it's telling me exactly what she wants to say and do. The problem is my own voice trying to come through for Janie. I've been trying to tell her what to do and I've hit a road block because it's apparent that it's not flowing. The only thing I can think of to do is tell myself to just shut up and write. Which is exactly what I'm going to do - finish chapter 1 right now.
On my iPod:
Cleaning out my Closet by Eminem
Showing posts with label voice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voice. Show all posts
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Passively Blind?
I reread a few reviews of Songbird today and was struck by the confirmation that I write passively. Not all the time, but that I have more than the recommended dose within the confines of a chapter. I went back to spell/grammar check and did a run through of my document and came up with about 1%. What am I missing? This reviewer is amazingly thorough and has given me wonderful feedback. I don't doubt that I have passive voice in my writing and I don't really believe the grammar check with my surprising 1%. I just don't know how to go through on my own work and find the passive statements. More than that there are some I just can't figure out how to reword into an active voice without entirely changing the meaning I was attempting to convey.
I wonder if part of the problem is the verb "to be". So often it's assumed that any form of this verb means passive voice - not true (yes, I checked)
So, my opening sentence: I was six when Jace died - is not passive. This sentence breaks down as noun verb adjective prepositional phrase. Even though there is a "to be" verb it's not passive, right? I feel like my head is spinning. It's a conversation I've had with myself and others that never seems to lead anywhere but to more confusion and frustration from me. Am I wrong about this sentence? If I am then I'm more screwed then ever!!
So where is it? How do I find it? This is what the grammar check pulled from my first chapter (an overall 2%passive voice)
His blue Chevy was parked crookedly, one of its front tires pushed up onto the grass.
His eyes were closed and his raspy breathing was barely there.
His words were stilted, coming through between his gasps.
I know why these sentences are passive and I know I could take this sentences and rewrite them, make them active, but to what end? So I don't have any passive voice in my chapter? So that the flow of the action and emotion is disrupted? When does passive become a problem? If 6% is the magic number that agents or editors go by how are they coming up with that? Grammar check?
I suppose what is bothering me the most is that until recently I never thought I wrote passively. I'm truly at a loss. I've taken syntax classing in university and made above average grades in the class. I remember dealing with active vs. passive, but I never had any problems with it. Until now. I would love to have thoughts on this and any pointers would be great!
On my iPod:
Save this House by Spirit of the West
I wonder if part of the problem is the verb "to be". So often it's assumed that any form of this verb means passive voice - not true (yes, I checked)
So, my opening sentence: I was six when Jace died - is not passive. This sentence breaks down as noun verb adjective prepositional phrase. Even though there is a "to be" verb it's not passive, right? I feel like my head is spinning. It's a conversation I've had with myself and others that never seems to lead anywhere but to more confusion and frustration from me. Am I wrong about this sentence? If I am then I'm more screwed then ever!!
So where is it? How do I find it? This is what the grammar check pulled from my first chapter (an overall 2%passive voice)
His blue Chevy was parked crookedly, one of its front tires pushed up onto the grass.
His eyes were closed and his raspy breathing was barely there.
His words were stilted, coming through between his gasps.
I know why these sentences are passive and I know I could take this sentences and rewrite them, make them active, but to what end? So I don't have any passive voice in my chapter? So that the flow of the action and emotion is disrupted? When does passive become a problem? If 6% is the magic number that agents or editors go by how are they coming up with that? Grammar check?
I suppose what is bothering me the most is that until recently I never thought I wrote passively. I'm truly at a loss. I've taken syntax classing in university and made above average grades in the class. I remember dealing with active vs. passive, but I never had any problems with it. Until now. I would love to have thoughts on this and any pointers would be great!
On my iPod:
Save this House by Spirit of the West
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Voice meets Content
I had an interesting moment today reading an expository piece by one of my students. The prompt asked the student to tell about where they would go on vacation if they could go anywhere in the world. Well, this particular student began with Yippee! Where would I go if I could go anywhere in the world? I'd go to...
This really got me thinking about how to teach voice in writing and how connections between voice and content play such a vital role in producing quality pieces. This particular student had been taught that by adding in an interjection it added voice. True - sometimes. They've also been taught to use a question paraphrasing the prompt to create a topic sentence. Good - but not great. And together it made me question if voice can really be taught.
Until I joined The Next Big Writer my reading was really limited to romance and classics I was forced to read in high school and university. Now I've had the opportunity to read so many different writers and styles that voice has taken on a new meaning to me. I look at some of the stories I've read (sexy vampires, love starved virgins, serial killers, warrior princesses from other worlds) and I realize that those characters and stories aren't just a collection of words on paper, they're the voice of the writer. So many of these novels I've read, I could never even imagine creating. Yet to the author, they're completely natural.
All of this leads me to wonder how far can you take the process of teaching writing. Not everyone who writes can write well, and I truly think that voice is what separates the good from the bad. A story can be well organized, descriptive, and grammatically correct yet do nothing for the reader. Another piece could be riddled with inconsistencies, and spelling mistakes yet the voice of the author draws the reader in so that nothing but the characters and tale matter.
What does this have to do with the student's writing? Well, I just wonder how this child got to the point where they thought it was okay to have a complete disconnect between their voice and their content. Obviously they've been taught, somewhere along the way, these 'rules' of voice and organization, and along that same road through school they've lost their own voice. It's possible they never had one, but this kind of teaching doesn't help develope one either. Is it good to use interjections to create voice? Sure - if they fit the content. Is it okay to use a question paraphrasing the prompt as a topic sentence - sure, if you can't think of anything better and you're out of time.
As a teacher, I wonder how to grade a paper like this. Content? Good. Organization? Good. Conventions? Good. Voice? Zilch. A student who studies and applies these learned 'rules' does his or her best. They've done what they've been told is 'good' writing. Yet, I can't imagine how much more formulaic it can get. It's like the five sentence, five paragraph structure I learned in high school. I didn't have to think about making connections, just filling in the blank lines. Does this really work? For some people undoubtedly.
Just as in art a child needs to learn how to draw a straight line, children need to learn the structure of writing. But like art, writing is subjective. Math has an answer. It's right or wrong, but with art and writing there are rules that are meant to be broken. Imagine if Picasso only painted realism, or if Shakespeare used the same number of sentences per paragraph in his plays. We can't teach a child to be the next Picasso or Shakespeare, but we can teach them to emulate the greats to find a style, a voice that suits them, that inspires them to find their own.
The rules are there, yes. Teach them, show them and then show them better. Or we may end up with a bookstore full of: Whee! One day my dog died. I felt sad and blue.
This really got me thinking about how to teach voice in writing and how connections between voice and content play such a vital role in producing quality pieces. This particular student had been taught that by adding in an interjection it added voice. True - sometimes. They've also been taught to use a question paraphrasing the prompt to create a topic sentence. Good - but not great. And together it made me question if voice can really be taught.
Until I joined The Next Big Writer my reading was really limited to romance and classics I was forced to read in high school and university. Now I've had the opportunity to read so many different writers and styles that voice has taken on a new meaning to me. I look at some of the stories I've read (sexy vampires, love starved virgins, serial killers, warrior princesses from other worlds) and I realize that those characters and stories aren't just a collection of words on paper, they're the voice of the writer. So many of these novels I've read, I could never even imagine creating. Yet to the author, they're completely natural.
All of this leads me to wonder how far can you take the process of teaching writing. Not everyone who writes can write well, and I truly think that voice is what separates the good from the bad. A story can be well organized, descriptive, and grammatically correct yet do nothing for the reader. Another piece could be riddled with inconsistencies, and spelling mistakes yet the voice of the author draws the reader in so that nothing but the characters and tale matter.
What does this have to do with the student's writing? Well, I just wonder how this child got to the point where they thought it was okay to have a complete disconnect between their voice and their content. Obviously they've been taught, somewhere along the way, these 'rules' of voice and organization, and along that same road through school they've lost their own voice. It's possible they never had one, but this kind of teaching doesn't help develope one either. Is it good to use interjections to create voice? Sure - if they fit the content. Is it okay to use a question paraphrasing the prompt as a topic sentence - sure, if you can't think of anything better and you're out of time.
As a teacher, I wonder how to grade a paper like this. Content? Good. Organization? Good. Conventions? Good. Voice? Zilch. A student who studies and applies these learned 'rules' does his or her best. They've done what they've been told is 'good' writing. Yet, I can't imagine how much more formulaic it can get. It's like the five sentence, five paragraph structure I learned in high school. I didn't have to think about making connections, just filling in the blank lines. Does this really work? For some people undoubtedly.
Just as in art a child needs to learn how to draw a straight line, children need to learn the structure of writing. But like art, writing is subjective. Math has an answer. It's right or wrong, but with art and writing there are rules that are meant to be broken. Imagine if Picasso only painted realism, or if Shakespeare used the same number of sentences per paragraph in his plays. We can't teach a child to be the next Picasso or Shakespeare, but we can teach them to emulate the greats to find a style, a voice that suits them, that inspires them to find their own.
The rules are there, yes. Teach them, show them and then show them better. Or we may end up with a bookstore full of: Whee! One day my dog died. I felt sad and blue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)