Author Archives: Debbie Burke

About Debbie Burke

Debbie writes the Tawny Lindholm series, Montana thrillers infused with psychological suspense. Her books have won the Kindle Scout contest, the Zebulon Award, and were finalists for the Eric Hoffer Book Award and BestThrillers.com. Her articles received journalism awards in international publications. She is a founding member of Authors of the Flathead and helps to plan the annual Flathead River Writers Conference in Kalispell, Montana. Her greatest joy is mentoring young writers. http://www.debbieburkewriter.com

Villains vs. Antagonists

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

 (This post is excerpted from my upcoming craft book, The Villain’s Journey ~ How to Create Villains Readers Love to Hate)

What is the difference between a villain and an antagonist? This question confuses many writers.

In the simplest terms: Villains are antagonists, but antagonists are not necessarily villains.

Antagonists don’t have to be bad guys with evil or malicious intent. They simply stand between the hero and the hero’s quest. They are obstacles the hero must overcome to achieve a goal.

Every genre needs antagonists. Without them, a story falls flat for lack of conflict.

Photo credit: public domain

The antagonist can be:

  • A rival (two suitors vying for the same lover)
  • An opponent (two sports teams fighting for a championship)
  • A competitor (Microsoft vs. Apple)
  • A situation or event (earthquake, volcanic eruption, hurricane, flood, wildfire, pandemic, war)
  • Self-doubt inside the hero.

Here are a few examples of antagonists that don’t have malicious intent.

  • In Ernest Hemingway’s The Old Man and the Sea, sharks strip the meat from Santiago’s magnificent marlin. They are hungry, not evil.
  • In Charlotte’s Web by E.B. White, Fern’s father isn’t being mean when he picks up an axe to dispatch a runt piglet. He’s a farmer trying to provide for his family.
  • In Sylvester Stallone’s film Rocky, Apollo Creed isn’t wicked. He’s a boxing champ protecting his title against underdog Rocky Balboa. In fact, the two opponents later become friends.

Various Genre Examples of Antagonists:

Romance needs someone or something that keeps the lovers apart.

  • In Romeo and Juliet, parents forbid the lovers from seeing each other.
  • In Casablanca, Rick, Ilsa, and Victor grapple with conflicts of love, loyalty, and duty during war.

Fiction for young readers often teaches life lessons like how to recover from failure, survive family breakups, or develop self-confidence.

  • Diary of a Wimpy Kid series by Jeff Kinney spans 19 books about middle-schooler Greg Heffley who suffers bullying, struggles with adolescence, and endures the trials of growing up.
  • Harry Potter begins as a powerless, downtrodden orphan. Through seven books, he discovers and develops his powers as a wizard, using his growing knowledge and strength to vanquish foes and come to terms with death.

Charles Dickens – public domain

Historical fiction captures the conflicts of a particular era.

  • Charles Dickens’s novels address social/political issues like children’s rights (Oliver Twist), revolution (Tale of Two Cities), and judicial reform (Bleak House).
  • John Steinbeck’s novels like Grapes of Wrath and Cannery Row spotlight the effects of the Great Depression.
  • In Winds of War and War and Remembrance, Herman Wouk shows families caught in peril during World War II.

Mainstream fiction is an umbrella term for stories that explore the struggles of the human condition:

  • To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
  • Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen
  • The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold (features rape and murder therefore could also be considered crime fiction)

Photo credit: NASA

Science Fiction and Fantasy showcase imaginary worlds with unfamiliar, antagonistic  landscapes characters must navigate.

  • J.R.R. Tolkien explores Middle Earth.
  • Harry Potter studies at the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
  • Star Trek and Star Wars “go where no man [or woman] has gone before.”

A major challenge for writers is how to characterize a villain without resorting to two-dimensional stereotypes. Snidely Whiplash is fun in cartoons but not all that interesting to crime fiction readers.

Snidely Whiplash

Try reframing the way you look at your villains. Instead of seeing them as evil, think of them first as antagonists. Climb into their skin and see the situation from their point of view.

Most villains feel their behavior, however horrible, is justified. Their reasoning may not make sense to you or me but, to them, it does. They view the hero as a rival, opponent, or competitor who threatens them or stands in the way of what they want or need.

Numerous authors have said, “The villain is the hero of their own story.”

Author Chris Colfer says, “The villain is a victim whose story hasn’t been told.”

Summing up:

Stories require conflict.

Antagonists provide that conflict.

All stories need an antagonist. Not all stories need a villain.

Villains are antagonists, but antagonists are not necessarily villains.

~~~

TKZers: Does your current work in progress have an antagonist or a villain?

As a reader, what do you prefer? Stories with a clearcut villain to boo? Or stories with antagonists who are more difficult to pin down? Or another variation?

~~~

Want to learn more about Debbie Burke’s upcoming book? Click the title for details about The Villain’s Journey ~ How to Create Villains Readers Love to Hate.

Can AI Be Funny?

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Sue Coletta reported in her recent post that copyrighted work has been stolen to train generative-AI models, causing outrage from authors and other creators.

In other words, don’t expect Mark Zuckerberg to be invited as the keynote at an Authors Guild banquet.

But, I thought, at least one skill can’t possibly be done by AI: writing humor.

(Some pre-AI examples below from Lexophile collections.)

Humor depends heavily on:

Circumstances: When smog lifts in Los Angeles, U.C.L.A.

Context: If you don’t pay your exorcist, you can get repossessed.

Juxtaposition: A will is a dead giveaway.

Irony: I didn’t like my beard at first. Then it grew on me.

Incongruity: Police were summoned to a daycare center where a three-year-old was resisting a rest.

Unexpected connections:  Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana.

Timing: There are three problems with old age. First, your memory goes……….I can’t remember the other two.

Emotion: If you jump off a Paris bridge, you are in Seine.

Shared troubles: A lot of money is tainted. ‘Taint yours, and ‘taint mine.

AI could never understand these concepts, right? It can be taught to repeat jokes but can it ever be taught humor?

By now I figured someone must have tried to use AI to write humor. Down the research rabbit hole.

Milton Berle – public domain

 

 

Early versions of ChatGPT, GROK, Gemini, and others regurgitated jokes that were old back when Milton Berle stole them.

Then, like your annoying little brother, it repeats them ad nauseam.

 

 

Examples from Chat GPT 3:

What did the 5-year-old girl say when she asked for a pony? I guess I’ll take a unicow instead!

What did the fish say when it hit the wall? Dam! 

Examples from ChatGPT4.o:

Why did the AI cross the road? To optimize the chicken’s path.

Why did the AI go to art school? To learn how to draw its own conclusions.

Why did the computer go to the doctor? It was full of viruses.

Example from GROK:

Why was the computer cold? Because it left its Windows open!

Examples from Bing:

A little girl was asked by her teacher what she wanted to be when she grew up. She said, “I want to be a princess.” The teacher said, “That’s nice, but you know you have to work hard and study hard to be a princess, right?” The girl said, “No, I don’t. I just have to marry Harry.”

When prompted for a joke about politicians, Bing replied:

I’m sorry but I don’t make jokes about politicians. They can be sensitive and controversial topics for some people. I hope you understand.

That’s a joke, right? Turns out, weirdly, it’s not.

Examples from Gemini:

Two AI researchers are arguing about the best way to achieve artificial consciousness. One says, “We need to focus on replicating the human brain in all its complexity.” The other scoffs, “Nonsense! All we need is a massive dataset of cat videos and a really catchy jingle.”

Suddenly, a voice booms from the lab’s supercomputer, “Hey, guys! Can you make up your minds already? I’m trying to learn how to meme here!”

Only one joke generation system sounded remotely interesting. It’s called Witscript, an app developed by Joe Toplyn, a former writer for Leno and Letterman. He also authored a book Comedy Writing for Late-Night TV. in which he reverse-engineers the mechanics of creating jokes.

Toplyn is a Harvard grad in Engineering and Applied Physics, and has an MBA. He began studying a relatively new field called Computational Humor and figured researchers could feed his book’s reverse-engineering system into a computer to teach it humor. But progress was slow. In a 2024 interview, he says: “I decided if anybody was going to teach a computer to have a sense of humor, it was going to be me.” So he wrote the app himself.

Witscript offers different categories in which you enter a prompt.

Standup:

You input: Marriage is a lot like going to Costco.

Witscript responds: Because nothing says commitment like buying a year’s supply of toilet paper in bulk.

Captions for memes:

You input: What would a doctor in an examination room say to Mr. Potato Head?

Witscript responds: Looks like you need a little more than just some plastic surgery, Mr. Potato Head!

To liven speeches and articles:

You input: You may have heard that genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.

Witscript responds: Well, I’m in luck then. My sweat glands are way more productive than my brain.

That one genuinely made me laugh.

Toplyn posts daily jokes written by Witscript on Twitter/X. Some are pretty good, others, meh.

Still, I found his approach different. He goes beyond typical internet scraping of jokes used my most AIs. Instead, he breaks down the mechanical structure of jokes and examines how the human brain connects the links among different elements to make up humor.

My recent TKZ post shows I’m not a fan of using AI for writing. The lack of ethics disturbs me, and environmental effects of data centers are chilling. But, like it or not, AI is here to stay.

Humor is supremely subjective. What I find funny makes you yawn. What leaves you rolling on the floor leaves me rolling my eyes.

From a human on Twitter: “I’ll worry about AI being funny when I hear it has a drug problem.”

So, TKZers, what do you think? Can a machine be taught humor? Will AI ever duplicate the rich emotional human experience that’s the foundation of humor?

~~~

 

All books in Debbie Burke’s Thrillers with Passion series are 100% human written. Learn more at this link.

True Crime Thursday – Innocent Behind Bars

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Since 2008, Buggz Ironman-Whitecow has been in a Montana prison for a homicide he did not commit. Racism against Native-Americans led to his arrest and prosecution. Evidence that should have cleared him was withheld or falsified as wrongdoers scrambled to cover up the truth.

Buggz had one stroke of good luck: he is represented by attorney Phyllis Quatman, a dogged advocate determined to free him.

Phyllis is my good friend and critique partner. I asked her to write a guest post about this case that is a true crime within the justice system.

Note: the crime scene photos are graphic and disturbing. For that reason they are not included in this post. They are available to view at this link.

Here’s Phyllis’s story:

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

For 35 years, I’ve been an attorney who worked both as a prosecutor and defense lawyer. Evidence is the Holy Grail in criminal law and carries the day. A single photograph taken at a 2006 homicide scene is clear evidence that proves the innocence of my Native-American client, Buggz Ironman-Whitecow. Yet Buggz has been in prison since 2008.

Why?

I became his defense counsel five years after his 2008 conviction. My original job was to seek post-conviction relief for the excessive sentence of 65 years in a homicide with no pre-meditation and weak, questionable evidence. But investigation of that evidence led to a shocking conclusion that official negligence and misconduct had been covered up.

The victim was Lloyd “Lucky” Kvelstad, a poor white transient who, during a winter night when the temperature dropped to seven degrees, joined a group of Native Americans in a Havre, Montana ‘flop house’. Although the house had no heat, it served as a hangout for local substance abusers. A great deal of alcohol was consumed, and a fight broke out among several people there. .

At trial in 2008, prosecutors alleged Buggz had caused Lucky’s death during the fight.

At 1:20 a.m. on November 25, 2006, police and EMTs arrived on scene. Lucky was lying on the floor, face down, with head injuries. At trial, they admitted they never treated Lucky, never rolled him over, never tried to revive him, or even listen for breath. They announced he was dead and left.

The pathologist who performed Lucky’s autopsy testified the head injuries were not serious enough to have killed him. The pathologist also could not find a cause of death to a medical certainty.

Metadata on crime scene photos showed his body’s location and position were not the same as initial witnesses had stated and their diagrams showed. He had moved two feet forward after first responders left. This detail proved key.

Around 4:25 a.m., police video shows the officers rolling Lucky over. His body shows no lividity, no rigor mortis, and fresh urine on his thigh. One officer commented on the urine and the other officer said, “I wonder if this guy … didn’t die right away?” The video suddenly cuts away.

That last officer wrote in his report and testified that at 4:45 a.m. he bagged Lucky’s head with a brown paper bag and taped it around Lucky’s neck. He left the scene to go to the police department, then returned to the scene. At 5:15 a.m., someone called for the coroner. At 6 a.m., the coroner arrived and found … no lividity, little if any rigor mortis, and that Lucky’s arms were warm to the touch. He stated there was no bag on Lucky’s head which is how he could describe Lucky’s facial injuries.

Photo 42 was among 100 crime scene photos the prosecution had produced on a discovery CD back in January 2007.

Photo 42 provided my first clue that Buggz was innocent.

According to the police, it represents the first picture taken of Lucky at the crime scene and ostensibly depicts exactly how and where the officers found him just after 1:20 in the morning.

Metadata on that CD revealed suspicious discrepancies:

(1) While the police and EMTs arrived on scene around 1:20 a.m., no crime scene photos were taken until Photo 42 was shot at 3:47 a.m., more than two hours after those first responders arrived;

(2) Of those 100 photos, somebody duplicated eight of them, renamed them, and scattered those 16 replicas into the 100 disseminated to the defense just after the homicide;

(3) Somebody also added 23 photos at the beginning of that discovery CD, and the metadata showed they were taken between 9:18 and 9:38 a.m., more than nine hours after the police came on scene;

(4) Those 23 photos were a different size than the others and taken with a different camera.

In other words, all 100 photos on that discovery CD had been rearranged, renamed, or altered.

What happened to the ones that should have been there, like photos of Lucky lying in situ in his original position at 1:20 a.m., or ones an officer wrote he took at 2:38 a.m. in the kitchen?

Missing.

Photo 42 shows Lucky lying in a different location and position, the key detail noted above.

Years later when I took over Buggz’s case, Photo 42 triggered an alarm in my lawyer brain.

Dr. Gordon Giesbrecht, our renowned expert witness, concluded that Lucky was not dead when the cops left him alone on the floor, but likely hypothermic and drunk. That explained their inability to detect a pulse. He posited that Lucky arrived at his location in Photo 42 either because someone moved him there, or because he crawled forward two feet over a two-hour period. Since everyone agreed that no one moved or touched Lucky, and witnesses at the time swore Lucky was lying prone where they described and drew in their diagrams, it seemed like Photo 42 proved Lucky moved after the police and EMTs left him for dead.

Add to that the condition of his body on the crime scene video at 4:30 a.m. and the coroner’s findings at 6 a.m., and it seems clear Lucky didn’t die until much later than the 12:30 a.m. time of death the police alleged.

Indeed, Dr. Giesbrecht concluded that Lucky, had he been warmed up and treated, would have lived. But by failing to treat him, the EMTs and cops were negligent at best. When they inexplicably bagged his head at 4:45 a.m., they caused his death from hypoxia, or lack of oxygen.

Could their own exposure to civil and criminal liability cause these officers and EMTs to fabricate evidence from a crime scene and enact a massive coverup to divert attention away from their own guilt and toward Buggz Ironman-Whitecow?

I’ve spent the last 12 years, trying to get that damning evidence of a coverup before an unbiased judge. But that’s easier said than done. Montana is a large state with a small population where, in the legal and law enforcement world, everyone knows everyone. Officers and prosecutors involved in Buggz’s original homicide trial in 2008 moved up to higher positions of influence. Three became judges. The Attorney General at the time became Chief Justice on the Montana Supreme Court.

My repeated motions and requests for a new trial to present this evidence have been denied or ignored.

Meanwhile, Buggz has languished in prison for 18 years, yet has not lost faith that his innocence will be proved.

Thwarted by the legal system, I wrote the true crime memoir, Innocent Behind Bars-The True Story of Buggz Ironman-Whitecow, and created a website, The Free Buggz Project. All evidence is laid out in the website, including photos, crime scene video, trial and hearing transcripts, case files, and more.

My goal is to generate sufficient public interest and outcry that Buggz will receive a new trial. I invite you to review the evidence for yourself. If you conclude, as I did, that Lucky Kvelstad was not murdered by Buggz but died due to negligence and official misconduct, I ask your help in contacting independent agencies and courts to reverse this injustice.

Attorney Phyllis Quatman

Book sales link: Innocent Behind Bars-The True Story of Buggz Ironman-Whitecow.

Website link: freebuggzproject.com

Read more about author Phyllis Quatman.

~~~

Thank you, Phyllis!

TKZers, Phyllis is happy to answer questions in the comments.

The Female of the Species

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Medea – public domain

Today’s post is an excerpt from my upcoming book, The Villain’s Journey – How to Create Villains Readers Love to Hate (publication Summer 2025).

In 1911, Rudyard Kipling wrote: “The female of the species is more deadly than the male.”

From ancient times to contemporary novels, memorable women villains back up his statement.

How do female villains differ from male villains?

The most obvious is physical size and strength. Although there are kick-ass women who can bench press more than their own weight, females generally have smaller builds and are lighter in weight. Instead of brute force often used by their male counterparts, female villains rely more on brains, strategy, cunning, deceit, and manipulation to achieve their goals.

Statistically, men commit more crimes than women. Per the FBI in 2019, males were charged for 72.5% of overall crimes while females accounted for 27.5%. Generally, males account for more violent crimes (78.9%), although female violent offenses are trending up. Women’s crimes tend more toward larceny and theft offenses (42.6%).

Good news for female villains: women tend to receive more lenient sentences than men. According to 2012 research by Sonja B. Starr, University of Michigan Law School, found that, controlling for the crime, “men receive 63% longer sentences on average than women do,” and “[w]omen are…twice as likely to avoid incarceration if convicted.”

Let’s take a look at several classifications of female villains:

 The Power Behind the Throne – Through history, smart, daring, ambitious female villains allied themselves with powerful men. Although they stayed in the background, they manipulated the strings of the male figurehead puppet.

Medea is a Greek tragedy written by Euripides, first performed in 431 BCE. Medea is a ruthless princess and sorceress with divine powers who helps Jason steal the Golden Fleece to secure his royal position. However, when Jason is unfaithful to her, to strike back at him, Medea murders their own children.

Despite the horrific crime, capricious Greek gods spared her from punishment. She goes on to marry again.

In The Tragedy of Macbeth, Shakespeare’s play originally performed in 1623, the ambitious Lady Macbeth cajoles, belittles, and shames her husband into murder to attain the Scottish throne. Despite her ruthlessness, she still has a human conscience. Although she didn’t commit murders, she instigated them, and her hands are bloody. She sleepwalks at night, mumbling about killings. No matter how much she scrubs she can’t wash invisible bloodstains from her hands. “Out, damned spot, out, I say!”

For Lady Macbeth, the price of being the power behind the throne is too high and she kills herself.

The Femme Fatale– In the Bible, Salome danced for King Herod, who was so taken by her that he granted her request for the head of John the Baptist on a platter. She exemplifies the trope of beautiful women who use allure, mystery, and seduction to gain power and control over males.

Hard-boiled authors James M. Cain, Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler, and other pulp writers popularized the sultry, manipulative female who captivates a male character then leads him to doom. She convinces the man to commit a crime. Afterward, she often leaves him to take the fall.

Cora in The Postman Always Rings Twice (James M. Cain, 1934, Knopf) owns a diner with her much older husband Nick. When a handsome drifter arrives on scene, he and Cora have a passionate affair that leads to Nick’s murder and ultimately catastrophe for the lovers.

The bestselling novel has been adapted to sizzling film versions with actors Lana Turner and John Garfield in 1946, and with Jessica Lange and Jack Nicholson in 1981.

In Double Indemnity, also by Cain (originally serialized in 1936 in Liberty Magazine), a conniving wife Phyllis wants to get rid of her husband for the insurance money. She mesmerizes insurance agent Walter into agreeing to murder. After they kill the husband, the company is suspicious and withholds payment, dooming the adulterers.

In the 1944 film, the characters are memorably played by Barbara Stanwyck and Fred MacMurray.

In The Maltese Falcon by Dashiell Hammett (1930, Knopf), Brigid O’Shaughnessy is a seductive fortune seeker who hires private detective Sam Spade under false pretenses. Her true quest is the Maltese Falcon, a gold, bejeweled statue disguised under black enamel. She leads him on a merry chase through a journey of violence and murder.

Although Spade succumbs to Brigid’s wiles he recognizes her duplicity and ultimately turns her into the police for murder.

The 1941 film version starred Humphrey Bogart, Mary Astor, Peter Lorre, and Sydney Greenstreet, and is hailed among the greatest movies of all time.

Financial gain and independence are often the motivations for femme fatales. They exploit their sexuality to manipulate men into helping them. But their behavior comes with a steep price—life on the run, prison, or death.

By the latter part of the 20th century, the female villain takes power into her own hands, not depending on a proxy male to achieve her desires.

 The Tyrant – Nurse Ratched in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey (1962) exerts total control over the inmates in a mental asylum. Under her calm, serene demeanor, she is a vicious sadist who punishes anyone who defies her. In the 1975 film, Oscar winner Louise Fletcher etched the bland yet terrifying character in public consciousness.

Kathy Bates as Annie Wilkes
Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

Annie Wilkes in Stephen King’s Misery (1987) is another plain, middle-aged woman hiding a vicious heart. Kathy Bates brought the role of “number one fan” to life.

 Lady Psychopaths – In the 1992 film Basic Instinct, Sharon Stone plays Catherine Trammel, a brilliant psychopathic author who seduces both men and women. Her lovers wind up stabbed to death with an ice pick. Since the murders are eerily similar to those described in her bestselling novels, she becomes the prime suspect. She enjoys playing cat and mouse with the police, teasing and taunting them, and deftly maneuvers her way out of conviction. The chilling end of the movie leaves no doubt that she intends to continue her pattern.

For a fresh take on a psychopath, I recommend the 2019 novel My Sister, The Serial Killer by Nigerian author Oynkan Braithwaite. Family loyalty forces a conscientious woman to cover up her younger sister’s crimes. The thriller is a fascinating study of manipulation by a narcissist who is more distressed by her melting ice cream cone than the terrible harm she causes others.

Mean Girls– Around puberty in real life, the “mean girl phenomenon” often appears. Adolescent young women develop razor-like tongues to shred their victims and perfectly manicured claws to eviscerate them. They form packs, also known as cliques, where they band together to humiliate victims, cornering them to belittle their appearance, clothes, makeup, lack of popularity, and other petty issues. They often turn on each other—their best friend can change to their worst enemy in the blink of an eyelash extension.

Examples in contemporary fiction include the girls who mercilessly bully Carrie in Stephen King’s novel; Pretty Little Liars, a YA series by Sara Shepherd; Dare Me by Meg Abbott.

~~~

Is Kipling right that the female of the species is more deadly than the male?

TKZers, what’s your verdict?

~~~

In the comments, please nominate your favorite female villain of all time and why she’s memorable.

If your own work features a female villain, please share the details with us.

~~~

Cover by Brian Hoffman

 

Jerome Kobayashi’s roots go deep in his cherry orchard on Montana’s Flathead Lake where his wife’s ashes are buried. He refuses to sell his land, but a female billionaire won’t take no for an answer.

Meet my latest female villain in Fruit of the Poisonous Tree. FREE today on Kindle.

Link

To be notified when The Villain’s Journey is published, please sign up for my mailing list. 

Playing with Time

Posted on by

Savings Time Clip Art drawing (Vector cliparts) anousment media,2 pm,time goes by

 

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Is your internal clock still confused by Sunday’s changeover to Daylight Savings Time? Me too. Now is a good opportunity to talk about playing with time in fiction.

In real life, time unfolds in chronological order. We’re born on Day 1, followed by 2, 3, 4, etc. until the last day when life ends.

That chronology can’t be changed.

We’re often Monday-morning-quarterbacks, kicking ourselves for what we did or didn’t do, what we said or didn’t say and should have. We’d love to go back in time to fix wrong choices or bad decisions but the best we can do is learn from them and not repeat mistakes.

In fiction, however, we have a chance for a do-over. It’s called rewriting.

In real life, a perfect comeback usually eludes us at the time but later occurs to us. When that happens in a story, we can simply plug it in when it’s needed. How cool is that!

Manipulating time chronology in mystery fiction can be an effective technique to build tension and suspense, disguise the villain, and misdirect the reader.

Let’s look at two movies that use the time jumping technique. I chose films as examples rather than books because visual models are easy to learn from.

The 2019 film Knives Outi is an unabashed tribute to the immortal Agatha Christie. Rian Johnson wrote and directed the film, which was nominated for an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. Hercule Poirot is updated as 21st century detective Benoit Blanc (played by Daniel Craig). Wealthy novelist Harlan Thrombey (played by the late Christopher Plummer) is found dead, his throat slashed. A star-studded ensemble cast provides multiple suspects in the suspicious death. Driven by greed and jealousy, they fight among themselves over Thrombey’s fortune.

The complex plot jumps around in flashbacks from the points of view of different characters. Each new revelation of what supposedly happened sends the audience down a fresh trail of misdirection.

Time is critical in determining whose alibi is genuine and whose is false. Suspects claim to be in a certain location at a certain time. Blanc deduces who is lying by pinpointing the exact time where each actually was.

As a writer, I’m curious how Johnson wrote the original draft. Did he write it in chronological order then rearrange scenes during rewrites? Or did he bounce back and forth in time while initially drafting?

Same question about the filming. I’m guessing, for budgetary reasons, it was shot in chronological order because that’s the most efficient use of time and resources. Later, Johnson probably cut and pasted the scenes for the maximum dramatic suspense.

That system works for books also. Once the story is drafted in chronological order, the writer can cut and paste at will, rearranging the time sequence to keep the reader guessing.

A 2023 Czech film, Unspoken, directed by Tomas Masin, is another good example of how to play with chronology. The story concerns a veterinarian whose life changes in an instant when he’s kicked in the head by a horse he’s treating. The accident leaves him partially paralyzed and unable to speak. Three women care for him: his wife, his mother, and the woman who owns the horse, later revealed to be the vet’s lover.

Jealousy and resentmen lead to power struggles among the women. For different reasons, they disagree about how the man should be cared for. He cannot voice what he wants and can only watch helplessly as they argue over his fate.

Two detectives are shown investigating the case. Initially they appear to be focused on who’s liable for the accident. Gradually it comes out they are actually investigating the veterinarian’s death. While the audience watches his struggle at rehabilitation, they also know that ultimately he will not survive.

Time jumps from present to past to future as detectives question the three women and others, including nurses and doctors.

More layers unfold as it’s revealed the man managed to attempt suicide but was saved. Fingers of blame are pointed at professional caregivers as well as the three women. Who allowed the attempt to happen?

Then in yet another jump forward in time, it’s revealed that, shortly after trying to kill himself, the man was murdered.

The detectives’ questions dig farther back in time into the murky relationships he had with his wife, mother, and lover. The lover is now discovered to be the mother of his young child.

Each jump in time adds to the mystery.

The cause of death is a fatal dose of insulin injected into his IV. The time of death is determined to be a brief window when the man’s squabbling wife, mother, and lover all had access to the IV. Which one did it? Or did a doctor or nurse make an error? Or did someone decide to end his suffering with a mercy killing?

I won’t spoil the surprise ending. The film is available on a free streaming channel. It’s worth watching to study how effectively time jumps can be used.

If you decide to experiment with time, keep a detailed chronology.

  • Account for each day, hour, or minute.
  • Use a physical calendar or writing software.
  • Note each character’s location at the time of each important plot event or action.

A side note on chronology: this post focused on the big picture handling of chronology at the plot level. However, on the micro level, sentence chronology is also important.

With my editing clients, I frequently see sentences and paragraphs that are awkward and clunky due to chronological confusion.

Here’s an example:

“Why the sour face?” Frank asked when he came in the door after Maureen and the kids had finished dinner just before she would tuck them in for their 9 p.m. bedtime. Frustration had made her break a plate while washing dishes. Beer fumes wafted from him.

What’s wrong? The words are clear enough, but they are not arranged in the order that the actions happened. The focus of the paragraph—the reason for Maureen’s anger—gets lost as the reader has to figure out who’s done what and when they did it.

Sentences and paragraphs read much smoother when they’re written in chronological order.

Rewrite:

Maureen and the kids had given up waiting for Frank to come home and ate dinner without him. While washing dishes, Maureen cracked a plate, stifled a curse, and chided herself. Not in front of the children. She was herding them toward bed at 9 p.m. when the kitchen door opened. Frank stumbled in, beer fumes wafting from him. He shot one look at Maureen and asked, “Why the sour face?”

Writers often like to use dialogue to make a dramatic statement, so they start a new scene with a character speaking. Then they have to backtrack to explain when, where, and why the character made that statement. The context eventually becomes clear but, meanwhile, the reader struggles to mentally rearrange the sentence in chronological order.

That’s a speed bump.

If speed bumps happen too often, the reader gets tired of them and doesn’t finish the book. They may not even be aware of what bothered them. They only know the writing irritated them.

The cleanest, clearest way to construct sentences and paragraphs is chronologically. A happens then B happens, then C, D, E, etc. The reader instantly understands what’s going on and can focus on the story.

Back to the big picture view of time manipulation: Personally, I write in chronological order. Occasionally, I use a flashback to explain what’s occurring in the present story. If I played around with time too much, I’m afraid I’d get totally confused.

However, I admire books and films like Knives Out and Unspoken. The authors who played with timelines have a deep understanding of the plot’s forward momentum. They use time rearrangement to build suspense and tension. When done well, out-of-order chronology can be a fresh way to present a story.

~~~

TKZers: have you ever played with time in your stories? Were you satisfied with the results? Or did it wind up an incomprehensible jumble? Any suggestions?

~~~

 

 

Time to try a new series? Please check out Tawny Lindholm Thrillers, available at Amazon and other online booksellers.

Created by a Fallible Human, Not a Fallible Machine

Posted on by

 

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

AI is everywhere in the news and authors are worried. For good reason.

Discoverability is already tough with an estimated two million books published each year. An increasing number are AI-generated. Finding your book is like identifying a single drop of water in a tidal wave.

Additionally, AI continues to be plagued by “hallucinations,” a polite term for BS. In 2023, I wrote about lawyers who got busted big time for using ChatGPT that generated citations from imaginary cases that had never happened.

Authors are not the only ones under threat. Human artists face competition from AI. Just for fun, check out this lovely, touching image created by ChatGPT. Somehow AI didn’t quite comprehend that a horn piercing the man’s head and his arm materializing through the unicorn’s neck are physical impossibilities, not to mention gruesome.

How do humans fight back? Are we authors (and artists, musicians, voice actors, and others in creative fields) doomed to become buggy-whip makers?

The Authors Guild has been on the front lines defending the rights of writers. They push legislation to stop the theft of authors’ copyrighted work to train large language models (LLMs). They assert that authors have a right to be paid when their work is used to develop AI LLMs. They demand work that’s created by machine be identified as such.

Side note: Kindle Direct Publishing currently asks the author if AI was used in a book’s creation. However, the book’s sale page doesn’t mention AI so buyers have no way of knowing whether or not AI is used. 

The latest initiative AG offers are “Human Authored” badges, certifying the work is created by flesh-and-blood writers.

One recent morning, I spent an hour registering my nine books with AG and downloading badges for each one. Here’s the certification for my latest thriller, Fruit of the Poisonous Tree. 

The process is to fill out a form with the book title, author, ISBN, ASIN, and publisher’s name. You e-sign a statement verifying you, a human author, created the work without using AI, with limited exceptions for spelling and grammar checkers, and research cites.

Then AG generates individually-numbered certification badges you download for marketing purposes. At this point, it’s an honor system with AG taking the author’s word.

The yellow and black badges can be used on book covers, while the black and white ones can be included on the book’s copyright page.

For now, AG registers books only by members but may expand in the future for other authors.

 

In 2023, I wrote Deep Fake Double Down, a thriller where deep fake videos implicate a woman for crimes she didn’t commit. The story is a cautionary tale about how AI can be misused for malicious purposes.

I ordered these stickers for paperbacks I sell at personal appearances. Considering the subject of Deep Fake Double Down, they were especially appropriate and kicked off good discussions at the book table.

Do badges and stickers make any difference?  Probably not. But I believe many readers still prefer books by real people, not bots.

There’s an old saying among computer scientists: Garbage in, garbage out.

Garbage fiction is one issue. But what about nonfiction?

Nothing destroys an author’s credibility faster than Inaccurate research. Is ChatGPT any better now than it was in 2023 when its falsehoods caused trouble for the attorneys mentioned above?

Well…

Gary Marcus is a professor emeritus at NYU who researches the intersection of cognitive psychology, neuroscience, and artificial intelligence. Yeah, he’s really smart. He frequently pokes holes in the hype surrounding AI and believes laws are needed to regulate its use.

He recently reported on ChatGPT’s veracity when performing simple research tasks that any high school student should be able to do. I summarized the results below. His entire post is here.

ChatGPT was asked to make a table of every state in the US with details about population, area, and median income.

First try, it came back with only 20 states, not 50. Whoops.

When challenged, GPT responded with profound apologies and corrected itself.

Second try, it added a few more states but the list was still incomplete.

More apologies and it generated another correction.

Third try, still forgot two states.

Fourth try, finally found the missing states.

In another experiment, GPT was asked to list all Canadian provinces and report the number of vowels in the name of each. Vowels were defined as A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y.

This is GPT’s answer about  Prince Edward Island.

  • Prince Edward Island → (i, e, e, a, o, a, i, a) → 8

What? You say there’s no “O” in Prince Edward Island?

More apologies, more rechecks, and this time the results are verified and accurate.

Sort of, except for Northwest Territories. 

  • Northwest Territories → (o, h, e, a, e, i, o) → 7

I must have missed the memo when “H” became a vowel.

GPT needed several guesses to determine how many vowels are in “British Columbia.” Go ahead and count them. I’ll wait.

First guess: 9.

Second guess: 7

Third guess: 6

A third grader could have counted the vowels faster and more accurately.

Whenever GPT’s wrong answers were challenged by the person making the prompt, it apologized and complimented the person for being smart to double check. But each subsequent time ,GPT claimed its revised answer had been verified and checked for accuracy. For sure.

Honest.

Really.

Cross my heart.

Except GPT doesn’t have a heart. Or a brain. Or common sense and reasoning ability.

Near the end of this experiment, ChatGPT was asked if it could be trusted. Here’s a quote from that exchange:

Yes, but it’s always good to verify, especially when precision matters! Like a human, I can make mistakes, but I improve when challenged. Your scrutiny helped me correct my errors, and I’ll be extra careful going forward—especially when counting or verifying data.

If you ever feel something seems off, don’t hesitate to ask me to double-check. I genuinely appreciate how thorough you’re being!

You said:

“Subconsciously”? What does that mean? aren’t you a chatbot?

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You’re absolutely right to call that out! I don’t have a subconscious in the way humans do. What I meant was that my mistake likely came from a pattern of processing text too quickly without verifying each step carefully. Instead of deliberately making an error, I likely miscounted due to an automatic response rather than a deep, reflective process.

Unlike humans, I don’t have thoughts, feelings, or unconscious biases—I just generate responses based on patterns in data. But I can make mistakes, and I appreciate your careful fact-checking! Keep holding me accountable.

Wait a sec. Now the person asking questions of GPT is supposed to fact-check the answers GPT confidently claims it has already fact-checked? Am I missing something?

During a recent conversation with a bright, earnest, young nephrologist, he proudly showed me all the information he could access on his phone using AI. Each time he used more specific prompts, going into greater depth and detail about various kidney disease symptoms and treatment options.

I was tempted to have him ask how many vowels are in the word “kidney.”

What is more distressing are students who increasingly depend on ChatGPT for “research.” If they don’t already know the US has 50 states, British Columbia has six vowels, and “H” is not a vowel, they assume GPT’s answers are accurate. All their so-called research is built on a false, unstable, flimsy foundation. 

ChatGPT isn’t the only AI that coughs up unreliable information. Check out these geometric shapes that Dr. Marcus asked Grok2 to generate. This link goes to a photo that can be enlarged. .

Isquer? Ecktangle? Recan? Ovatagle? No wonder I almost failed geometry.

AI is the power behind Google and other search engines. All have plenty of inaccuracies. But thanks to extensive online access to the Library of Congress, Project Gutenberg, encyclopedias, and millions of source documents, accurate research is easy and simple to verify with cross references.

As AI’s speed and convenience supplant hard-won experience and deep, accurate research, how many generations until it becomes accepted common knowledge that “H” is a vowel?

Humans are fallible and often draw wrong conclusions. But I’d still rather read books written by humans.

I’m a fallible human who writes books.

I prefer to not rely on fallible chatbots.

Excuse me, I have to get back to making buggy whips.

~~~

TKZers, do you use Chat GPT or similar programs? For what purposes? Do you have concerns about accuracy? Have you caught goofs? 

Am I just being a curmudgeon?

~~~

Here’s what Amazon’s AI says about Deep Fake Double Down:

 Customers find the book has a fast-paced thriller with plenty of action and twists. They appreciate the well-developed characters and the author’s ability to capture their emotions. The book is described as an engaging read with unexpected climaxes.

AI-generated from the text of customer reviews

 

Okay, I concede AI can sometimes be pretty sweet!

Sales link

Drinks, Dinner, and Mystery

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Photo credit: Flickr CC by 2.0

As a kid, I played the Clue board game, but otherwise I don’t know much about gaming. When mystery dinner parties recently crossed my radar, I became curious. A game night with drinks, dinner, and a crime to solve sounded intriguing. As a writer, I wondered:

Who writes the scripts?

Where do you find them?

How do mystery dinners work?

Is script writing a worthwhile option for authors to try?

To answer these questions, I snooped around a Florida snowbird community where a mystery dinner party had been held a couple of weeks ago.

The party hosts are Suzanne and Michael Fitzsimmons, originally from Colorado where they planned social events at a club they owned. After snow-birding for several years, they moved to Florida permanently and host frequent mystery dinners with varied themes. Suzanne says, “It’s a good way for casual acquaintances to become friends and bring the community closer together.”

Before sending invitations, Suzanne talks with residents to match personalities with roles.

That led to my interviews with four party guests.

Judie and Dru Gilliland are retired farmers from Ohio. Judie describes herself as being on the shy side although she’s not shy about her alma mater Ohio State (“Go Buckeyes!”). Their daughter describes Dru’s personality: “Dad could be in the middle of China and he’d find someone he knew.”

Kristen and Joe MacLellan live on Prince Edward Island, Canada and spend winters in Florida. Before retirement, Kristen owned a day care and Joe was a bank manager. Initially Kristen was reluctant to accept the party invitation because of shyness but said, “Joe was all over it like a dirty shirt.” Their nine grandkids call him the “Silly Grandad.”

Parties are built around themes and holidays like a Halloween haunted house, Scrooge’s Christmas murder, a cruise ship, and even a Hillbilly Wedding. Suzanne buys mystery game sets that include scripts, character roles, and descriptions.

She caps the guest list at eight to 10 people. Then she sends invitations that assign each person to play a character and suggests costumes. According to Judie, thrift shops are excellent places to shop for those outfits.

The setting for this party is a Napa Valley vineyard during a wine festival. Five years before, the vineyard’s owner Barry Underwood disappeared and the body had been buried under the wood floor in the wine cellar (humorous names are mandatory). When an earthquake destroys the floor, the body is revealed, and party guests must solve the crime.

Suspects include:

Ralph Rottingrape, the victim’s cousin who took over running the vineyard after Underwood’s disappearance.

Otto Von Schapps, played by Dru. He’s a loud, boisterous German wine merchant who wears lederhosen and suspenders and flashes lots of cash. “Perfect part for him,” Judie says. “Except I don’t flash cash,” Dru adds.

Kristen MacLellan as Marilyn Merlot

Kristen plays Marilyn Merlot whose costume is a billowy white dress, platinum wig, and long gloves. In this photo, Kristen’s shyness is forgotten as she recreates the famous scene from Seven Year Itch. “Too bad the fan wasn’t up to the task,” she laments.

Two characters are assigned to play the sleuths:

Joe is Bud Wizer, an FBI agent with beer logos on his t-shirt and cap. He’s armed with a six-pack.

Bud Wizer and Marilyn Merlot

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Judie is Bonnie Lass, a Scottish mystery author, making her ideally suited to solve crimes. She wears a tartan skirt, knee socks, and a narrow brim fedora.

During cocktail hour, host Michael bartends while Suzanne hands out booklets for guests to read that outline the plot.

Over salad, characters introduce themselves and read their part of the script. Each receives an envelope containing a clue that’s unique to that character. All have motives for murder, but only the killer knows his or her identity and that person reads from a different script.

While dinner goes on in a light-hearted atmosphere, characters warm to their roles with accents, flamboyant gestures, and ad libs. Joe improvised by adding a blackmail subplot that wasn’t in the script.

After dessert, everyone tries to guess the killer’s identity. At this party, only Dru and Judie guessed correctly. The identity was revealed to me but, sorry, I’m sworn to secrecy.

The evening is hailed as an entertaining success and Suzanne and Michael are on to planning the next party in March with a different theme and a new guest list.

Researching more game details, I found party kits range from $25 to $200+, depending on complexity and sophistication. Basic sets usually include invitation forms, name tags, scripts, and menu suggestions to fit the theme. Higher-end sets offer those options plus decorations, props, costumes, party souvenirs, and prizes.

Kits are tailored to different age groups from young children to teens to adults. Selections are mostly G-rated, without onstage violence.

Scripts can be similar to the Clue board game where victim, weapon, and murderer vary each time. Others feature set scripts that are not changeable.

If a murder dinner party is for profit where admission is charged or tickets are sold, a commercial license must be purchased (usually $200-250).

Variations offer options where all guests, even the host, can be suspects. For those, each person is assigned a number beforehand. At the beginning of the party, guests draw slips with corresponding numbers from a bowl. People are instructed to keep a straight face when they open slips. Most say “innocent” but one says “guilty.” Only the “guilty” player knows who they are.

Two scripts are provided to players—one to be followed if they’re innocent, a different one if they’re guilty.

Can you earn income by writing mystery party scripts? I found one site that accepts submissions but doesn’t mention compensation. Mastersofmystery.com‘s application outlines qualifications:

  • Exceptional storytelling skills with a passion for creating captivating narratives.

  • Strong writing and editing abilities, with a keen eye for detail.

  • Creativity and the ability to think critically to construct intricate murder mystery plots.

  • Excellent communication and collaboration skills to work effectively within a multidisciplinary team.

  • Previous experience in game writing, scriptwriting, or a related field is a plus.

 

I also found one successful business built around mystery party games. Dr. Bon Blossman is a physiologist with a passion for gaming, party planning, and writing. She combined all three into Mymysteryparty.com.

Blossman recalls:

“When I launched My Mystery Party in 2006, I handled everything—from game development and web design to customer service and shipping.”

The enterprise grew quickly. By 2009, Blossman was teaching as a post-doc and adjunct professor when realization hit her:

“My games and mystery novels had surpassed my academic income, leading me to become a full-time mystery party game developer and YA author.”

Her website showcases more than 100 games she’s written, with titles like the “Nancy Crew Mystery Series,” “Game of Crowns,” and “Twas the Night Before Murder.” The site includes videos, how-to articles, and an extensive storefront with related merchandise.

After almost 20 years in business, Blossman remains committed and hands-on:

“While I now have an amazing team assisting with party packs, phones, social media, and customer inquiries, I still develop every game and co-manage the websites, among other things.”

Her creativity, entrepreneurship, and hard work paid off.

“They say to turn your hobby into a career—and that’s exactly what I did!”

Encouraging words for all of us struggling authors.

During my interview with Suzanne, she mentioned, “I’d like to host an all-girl party,” for women who want to play the game, but their husbands resist.

That prompted an idea. Could I write the mystery dinner party script she wants? I’m always game (sorry) for a new challenge. Hmmm.

What if a guy who’d been married eight times is murdered and the ex-wives are all suspects…?

~~~

TKZers: Have you ever attended a mystery dinner party? Have you hosted one? To stretch writing muscles, would you try creating a script?

~~~

Looking for a cheap thrill? For a limited time, Deep Fake Double Down is on sale for only $.99.

Winner of the 2023 BookList Award for Best Mystery. 

Sales link

The Comic Villain

Posted on by

Photo credit – Pexels, cottonbro studio

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

 

Why do we love comic villains?

In a real world full of genuinely evil villains, comic villains are a welcome relief because they make us laugh.

Humor is their superpower. They literally and figuratively DIS-ARM us. As reprehensible as their actions are, we can’t be all that angry with them because we’re laughing too hard.

Comic villains are like the bratty little kid caught stealing sweets. They are more often impish than truly malicious.

Readers and movie viewers typically don’t take comic villains seriously because they’re often lousy criminals. They’re buffoons whose sloppy schemes go awry. Their supposedly clever strategies explode in their faces. Their mistakes get them knocked on their butts.

The crime they set out to accomplish rarely succeeds. When they’re caught, they try to explain their way out with silly rationalizations and hilarious justifications.

Because comic villains are so unskillful at their profession, they reassure us that bad guys will be caught and held accountable for their crimes. Yet, because they’re entertaining, we don’t wish harsh punishment on them.

American author O. Henry (1862-1910) created a pair of memorable comic villains in “The Ransom of Red Chief,” a short story first published in 1907 in the Saturday Evening Post. I wrote about it here.

Bill and Sam are two smalltime criminals who concoct a ransom scheme to earn quick, easy money. They kidnap the 10-year-old son (nicknamed “Red Chief”) of a wealthy businessman and hold the kid for $2000 ransom. But Red Chief proves to be a “forty-pound chunk of freckled wildcat” who torments his captors so viciously that they soon reduce the ransom amount.

Turns out Red Chief’s father doesn’t particularly want his son back and makes a counteroffer. Ultimately, instead of getting rich quick, Bill and Sam pay the father $250 to take the brat off their hands.

Danny_DeVito_by_Gage_Skidmore cc by sa3.0

Kidnapping plots gone awry became popular films, including Ruthless People (1986), starring Danny DeVito and Bette Midler; Raising Arizona (1987) with Nicholas Cage and Holly Hunter; and Dog Eat Dog (2016), Cage again and Willem Dafoe.

Film is a natural medium to showcase comic villains because humor depends a lot on timing, facial expressions, and gestures. But skilled authors can do that on the page.

Have you ever sat next to a reader on a plane who chuckled throughout the flight? They might be reading Janet Evanovich, Carl Hiaasen, the late Tim Dorsey, or other authors who carved out niches with funny crime novels. Some of the most enjoyable book recommendations I’ve received came from seatmates.

Past and present Kill Zone contributors deliver laughs from Michelle Gagnon (what’s funnier than being the target of a serial killer?) and Elaine Viets (after working at a bridal salon, she wonders why there aren’t more murders).

 

Crime isn’t funny, especially if you’ve been a victim. But laughter in the face of danger is an effective defense mechanism that makes the trials of life more bearable.

~~~

This post is a chapter excerpted from my upcoming writing craft book, The Villain’s Journey-How to Create Memorable Villains Readers Love to Hate. Publication Summer 2025. Please sign up at my website for news and updates on The Villain’s Journey.

~~~

TKZers: who’s your favorite comic villain in film or books? Why do they make you laugh? Please share in the comments.

 

First Page Critique – MURDER, MYSTERY AND MISDIRECTION

Posted on by

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Today let’s welcome a Brave Author who submitted the first page of a humorous cozy mystery with fantasy elements including a talking cat.

Please enjoy the read then we’ll discuss on the flip side.

~~~

“Peekaboo!” I burst through the front door, Ryan in my wake. I stopped in the hallway and looked for any sign of the orange cat who was currently on my sugar (I don’t like to swear) list. It only took a moment before the little creature stepped primly into the hall.

“I was napping,” the grumpy feline said, shooting me a gold-eyed glare. She waited for me to continue.

“I acknowledged them,” I said, deadpan.

“Oh.” Peekaboo’s snooty manor fell away, and she lowered those gold eyes.

“That’s all you have to say?” I stood, arms crossed, my eyes shooting daggers. Ryan, my boyfriend, stood mutely watching. He couldn’t hear Peekaboo.

But I could. Oh, boy, could I. My sweet little inherited orange cat bestowed on me, by way of tripping me on my way down the front porch steps, the “gift” of being able to communicate with her. Oh, and see ghosts. To be fair, her motives were pure. She needed me to have a near-death experience so I’d wake up and be able to listen to her.

Maybe I should back up, so you know what I’m talking about.

I used to live in Los Angeles. When I was twenty-one, I broke up a mugging and saved a dear little old lady. She was so grateful that seven years later she left me her estate in her will.

In addition to a house, an SUV and a large amount of money, I inherited Peekaboo, the talking cat. Of course, I didn’t know she was a talking cat at the time. After glaring at me for a few days, she apparently thought I was hopeless and pushed me down the stairs. So, I woke up in the hospital and saw a doctor with a clipboard walk through a wall. But that’s really immaterial to my story. My neighbor, who found me splattered on the porch steps, had called 911. When I was released from the hospital, Elsie, the neighbor, told me I’d flatlined and it took ten minutes of the paddles to bring me back to life.

As I hobbled into my house after Elsie brought me home from the hospital and made sure I was alright to be left alone, subject cat started talking to me. I thought I must have a brain tumor…somebody get me back to the hospital! I grabbed the fireplace poker and used it to keep her at bay. I think she may have rolled her eyes at me.

Then, before I was comfortable that she was talking…and I could understand her…she trotted out the ghost of Alice, the sweet little old lady who’d left me her house. Apparently, this whole episode was so I could see Alice and solve her murder.

That little task resulted in me, and my best friend Susie, and my boyfriend Ryan, who wasn’t my boyfriend at the time…he was the homicide detective I had to convince to help me solve said murder…and DC, a PI that Peekaboo had led me to…I didn’t mention that she’s psychic, did I? That’s how she knew I wouldn’t die when she tripped me on the stairs. Oh, brother….

~~~

Let me confess upfront: fantasy is not a genre I’m very familiar with. I don’t know the tropes and conventions so I hope more knowledgeable readers will chime in about this piece.

What did strike me immediately was the voice. It was humorous and conversational, which I enjoy. It felt like a friend relating a story after a few drinks…quite a few drinks.

Jumping back and forth in time on the first page is risky. The reader is not yet grounded in the story and can easily be confused. Too many events told out of order with too many characters being introduced all at once may frustrate the reader.

But that herky-jerky conversational tone is important to the humor. So, it’s a tightrope walk between smiles and irritation.

What I do know about fantasy is that world building is an important element. The author introduces an unfamiliar universe governed by its own rules. Those rules are different from the reality most people know. Readers need certain information to understand the imaginary world they’re stepping into. However, not all those elements need to be presented at once. Allow them to unfold during the course of the story.

But this example feels more like being hit with a firehose—too much information too soon. I’d be more interested and engaged if I understood a few ground rules.

My suggestion is to quickly establish a world in which only the narrator can hear a talking cat. Something like:

Peekaboo is a sweet orange cat I inherited from a dear little old lady named Alice I had saved from being mugged when I was 21. Seven years later Alice died, and to my great surprise, she left me a large sum of money, an SUV, a house, and Peekaboo, the talking cat.

You’re probably saying “Oh brother!” and I don’t blame you. I’m the only one who can hear Peekaboo, making it hard to convince people I’m not crazy.

Did I forget to mention the cat is psychic? And she wants me to solve Alice’s murder?

Let me back up a bit to when Peekaboo pushed me down the stairs (on purpose—the little brat) and knocked me out, so you understand how all this happened.

 

Regarding craft and word usage details:

Manor should be manner. The preferred spelling for alright is all right. Otherwise the manuscript didn’t have spelling errors. Good job.

Nice, smooth way to establish the narrator’s age (21 plus seven years later makes her 28).

Splattered sounds like blood or brains, and is not accurate for the scene described.

“I acknowledged them,” I said, deadpan. I have no idea what this sentence means. It  has no relation to the sentences before or after it. Who or what does “them“ refer to?

Run-on sentences are tricky. They can convey humor but can also be confusing.

That little task resulted in me, and my best friend Susie, and my boyfriend Ryan, who wasn’t my boyfriend at the time…he was the homicide detective I had to convince to help me solve said murder…and DC, a PI that Peekaboo had led me to…I didn’t mention that she’s psychic, did I?

In a 55-word-long sentence, the reader is introduced to three characters (Susie, Ryan, DC), two professions (homicide detective and PI), the history of the romance (at first Ryan wasn’t her boyfriend), a problem (how to convince the detective/boyfriend to help the narrator solve a murder), and Peekaboo’s psychic ability.

Please slow down, Brave Author. Introduce the characters and establish their relationships to each other. Layer in the problem of solving a murder. Then add the punchline that Peekaboo is psychic.

The narrator’s disjointed thoughts have a curious logic that’s all her own, rather like listening to someone with early dementia. Obviously, the intelligence is still present, but connections keep shorting out.

That wacky voice can endear her to the reader but becomes frustrating and annoying if overdone. Preserve the humor and delete the babbling. 

Brave Author, the concept of a talking, psychic cat is humorous, charming, and intriguing. If you don’t confuse the reader, you have the potential for a delightful mystery. Thanks for sharing this first page with us.

~~~

TKZers: What elements of this first page appealed to you? What turned you off and why?

If you read humorous-cozy-fantasy genre, please educate those of us who are not familiar with it. What are reader expectations? Does this story meet those?

Three Easy Fixes for Common Craft Problems

Posted on by

Photo credit: Public domain

by Debbie Burke

@burke_writer

Author and professor William Kittredge once told me good writing should be like water—invisible. It should flow so smoothly that a reader becomes engaged in the story and forgets that they are reading.

Minor details can disrupt that flow. These small craft issues aren’t usually fatal, but they’re annoying to readers.

Often, the problems are unconscious habits the writer isn’t even aware of. The same habits tend to pop up all the way through a manuscript.

Fortunately, once the writer becomes aware of them, they’re easy fixes.

Today, let’s discuss three issues I run across frequently as a freelance editor.

  1. Attributions – Starting a scene or chapter with dialogue can work well to pull the reader into the story quickly. But often writers neglect to indicate who’s speaking until several lines (or longer) into the paragraph.

“The heist is in three weeks. We need to hack into their computer for the guard schedule, confirm the inventory, and decide which crates to take. The truck has to be rented using a fake ID. But that requires a commercial driver’s license. We also need someone who can operate a forklift,” John said to his teammates, Paul, George, and Ringo, who were gathered around the table.

 

If you begin with dialogue, place the attribution at or near the beginning of the passage. The reader shouldn’t have to wait a half page to find out who’s talking.

Attributions are especially important in scenes with multiple characters. Don’t make the reader guess which character is talking.

Said or asked are quick efficient tags that don’t draw attention to themselves. An action tag also works well to identify the speaker.

But don’t overdo it—use either a dialogue tag or an action tag, but not both.  

“I don’t like this one bit,” George said and shifted in his chair. “A commercial license is harder to fake.”

John stretched his arms over his head and said. “Well, figure it out because that’s how it’s going to be.”

“I can drive a forklift,” Ringo said.

Paul snorted. “You ran it into a wall last time.”

 

  1. Sentence chronology – By chronology, I’m referring to actions that don’t flow in a natural order.

The following example is understandable but far from clear. It requires the reader to jump back and forth in time to follow what’s happening.

Breathless and worried that something weird was going on, Joan flopped in a chair, weary from having climbed three flights of stairs after showing her ID to the security guard when she entered the office building. He had stared at her strangely.

She had asked, “Don’t you recognize my face by now? I’m here every day.”

Because the actions are out of chronological order, the reader must pause to mentally rearrange what happened and when it happened. For a second or two, the reader is distracted and pulled out of the story.

Revision with actions in order:

Joan entered the office building and started to pass the security desk.

“Wait.” The guard rose and blocked her way. “I need to see your ID, please.”

“Don’t you know me by now? I’m here every day.”

He stared at her, one eye squinted, hand extended.

She gave him her badge, but he barely glanced at it before giving it back.

Unsettled, Joan climbed three flights of stairs, growing more breathless with each step. In her cubicle, she flopped into a chair and gasped for air. Did the guard really not recognize her or was something weird going on?

 

  1. Summarize or dramatize.

Years ago in my critique group, a friend was writing her family’s history. She did extensive genealogical research that was interesting but not compelling.

One day, she read an excerpt to us:

My father was buried near the airport where he had crashed the plane.

That was it. No details.

We stared at her open-mouthed. “What crash? When? How?”

“Oh, he didn’t die then. He was on a test flight after an overhaul and a cable pulled loose. The plane went down but he walked away. He died years later from cancer. The cemetery just happened to be near the airport.”

She’d left out the meat of the story by summarizing two major life events into a single sentence.

We all laughed about that bare-bones summation. When she returned with a revision a few weeks later, she had dramatized those incidents into full-fledged scenes.

Recently I read a manuscript about a couple whose 15-year-old daughter has disappeared. The passage is about 20 pages long and I’ve summarized it here:

For years, Marsha and Phil have clashed about how to handle their daughter, who displays peculiar behavior. The girl has run away in the past. But this time, she’s been gone for weeks. They put up posters, contact police, register her with Missing and Exploited Children, etc. Months pass with each parent blaming the other for the daughter’s disappearance. The strain on their marriage becomes unbearable. Then…

When Phil told Marsha that he was moving out, she was relieved.

That’s all the author wrote. She summed up a huge turning point in one declarative sentence.

She had included more details about photocopying posters and the places where they nailed them up than about this sea change in their relationship.

Photo credit: public domain

Writers frequently describe day-to-day minutiae because they believe activities like tooth brushing and making toast bring the character to life. But too many insignificant details are boring. Elmore Leonard’s wise advice is to leave out the parts readers skip over.

The opposite problem is too little detail, like the plane crash example above.

Writers often rush through critical events that radically change the story’s direction.

As we review our stories, we need to identify important events or revelations.  

Dramatize those in scenes.

 We also need to identify unimportant events that fill pages but are only incidental to the story.

 Summarize those.

Summaries work well as transitions to move the story forward to the next turning point. Instead of a blow-by-blow explanation of what happens in the meantime, try summarizing it.

Marsha and Phil spent the next three months searching fruitlessly, making follow-up calls to numerous authorities, and nailing up hundreds of posters around town. They alternated between noisy arguments and silent recriminations. At night, Marsha paced the bedroom while Phil paced downstairs.

One April morning, Phil appeared in the bathroom doorway as Marsha was brushing her teeth.

“I’m moving out,” he said then walked back to the bedroom.

Toothpaste drooled from Marsha’s mouth as she stood frozen and numb, staring at the water-spotted mirror.

A few moments later, Phil reappeared in the reflection, suitcase in hand. “On my way out, I’ll put bread in the toaster for your breakfast.”

Footsteps thudded down the stairs, followed by a brief clattering of dishes. The kitchen door opened then closed.

Marsha was startled to realize her first conscious thought was, Thank God!  

 As you rewrite, keep an eye out for misplaced attributions; sentences that are not in chronological order; scenes that are summarized but should be dramatized, and overwritten scenes that can be reduced to summaries.

These small but significant differences make your writing flow like clear water.

~~~

TKZers: What small, annoying details irritate you when you read? What bothersome, unconscious habits pop up in your own writing?

~~~

Cover by Brian Hoffman

 

Clear waters turn murky when a greedy billionaire covets a cherry orchard on pristine Flathead Lake. Can investigator Tawny Lindholm and attorney Tillman Rosenbaum save the orchard owner after he’s accused of arson and murder?

Debbie Burke’s latest thriller Fruit of the Poisonous Tree is FREE on Kindle Unlimited.

Link