Tag Archives: #amwriting

Wordle and the Cute Villain

Posted on by

We’ve talked about word games a few times here, and several of the TKZ crowd have mentioned Wordle as being a favorite.

For people unfamiliar with the game, the challenge is to guess a hidden five-letter word within six tries by creating words and seeing how the Wordle game responds. The simplest way to explain it is by example. I have a habit of using the word “HOUSE” as my first guess.

If a letter is in the solution and in the correct placement, it’s shown on a green background. If the letter is in the solution, but not in the correct place, the background turns yellow. If the letter isn’t in the word at all, the background is gray.

In a game I played a couple of weeks ago, here’s how the first four guesses looked:

After the first three guesses, I had all five letters of the answer, but I wasn’t able to come up with a word that was a valid solution. (Wordle will not let you enter arbitrary letters. Your guess has to spell an actual word, and I don’t think it’s fair play to look up possibilities online.)

The only word I came up with was “ROILS,” but I knew it was wrong because the letter “I” couldn’t be in the third position. Still, it was the only English word I thought of, so I entered it just to see if any of the other letters would be in the correct positions.

This was the strangest Wordle game I’d ever played. After the fourth guess, there are only two possible solutions: IOLRS or LORIS. I didn’t know either of those words, but LORIS seemed the most likely, so I went with that one.

It was the first time I solved a Wordle game with a word I hadn’t heard of. (My apologies to all the linguists and zoologists out there.) Of course, I looked up the meaning of the word, and found that a loris is a very interesting animal.

* * *

You can’t get much cuter than this guy. Big, sad eyes in a furry little body. So adorable. So cuddly. You want to pick one up and pet it.

Not a good idea.

According to worldwildlife.org,

With wide eyes and furry bodies, these slow-moving, pint-sized primates look like cuddly stuffed animals. But their venom-filled bites can rot flesh and cause anaphylactic shock in humans. (my emphasis)

Ouch.

It turns out the loris is the only mammal that is venomous. When I considered that surprising fact, it got me thinking about villains in general. Maybe the most dangerous ones aren’t the big, bad guys with the tattoos and spiked hair. Or those dark space villains. You know they’re the bad guys.

Maybe the scariest ones are the adorable characters whom everybody loves and trusts. The ones you can’t imagine would ever hurt you.

Here are a few examples I found on screenrant.com:

  • Hans, the handsome prince in Frozen, who appears to be in love with the Princess Anna, but really just wants to marry her to usurp the throne.
  • The “killer rabbit” in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. How dangerous could a cute little white rabbit be?

  • Dawn Bellwether in Zootopia seems to be a cute sheep helping ensure cooperation in her community, but in fact, she’s the mastermind behind a conspiracy.

In addition, I asked our TKZ expert on villainry, Debbie Burke, to give me some ideas of villains who fit this category. She mentioned nurses who kill patients. Makes me want to try doubly hard to stay out of the hospital.

 

But maybe the scariest villain of all was Anthony Freemont in the 73rd episode of The Twilight Zone. He was a really cute kid with powers of evil.

I saw that episode many years ago, but it still gives me chills when I think about it.

* * *

Over to you, TKZers: Are you a Wordler? Did you solve the recent Loris puzzle? On another subject, who is your favorite villain? Do your characters ever become victims of wolves in sheep’s clothing?

* * *

 

They may be cute, but there’s nothing villainous about these two detectives. 10-year-old tree-climbing Reen and her 9-year-old, feet-on-the-ground cousin Joanie are on a mission to find a hidden treasure, but along the way they discover something more important than what they were looking for.

EBOOK ON SALE NOW: 99¢ on Amazon, Barnes&Noble, and Apple Books.

Talent vs. Grit

Posted on by

Talent (noun): a natural skill or ability to be good at something, especially without being taught.

* * *

A couple of weeks ago, James Scott Bell mentioned the enormous talent of James Cagney, and that got me wondering about just what talent is and how much it plays a part in success.

We’ve all heard sports scouts talk about athletes who are “naturals.” They’re highly recruited for what seems to be their inborn ability to play the game. Most of us don’t have that kind of obvious talent, but each of us has certain inborn abilities that we can capitalize on. But how can we identify what we’re really good at? One way is by taking a talent test.

I’m not a particular fan of personality tests or talent identification tests. I think testing for specific skills is more useful. But in preparation for writing this blog post, I took a talent quiz at ProProfs. (I have no idea if their test is a reliable judge of specific talent, but I thought it would be fun to see their assessment.)

Among other things, the results indicated that I have a creative flair for story-telling. That was encouraging, but it doesn’t mean I’ll be able to wip (misspelling intended) out a 70,000 word masterpiece while sipping my raspberry-coconut smoothie and having my nails done. It won’t solve the plot problems I’m having with my next book or teach me more about the genre-specific structure I need. It also won’t do much to ensure my text is error-free or help me format and upload the book to the major retail sites. For all those, I need something more.

* * *

Grit (noun): firmness of character; indomitable spirit; pluck.

The answer may lie in an individual’s passion and perseverance, otherwise known as “grit.” While talent may give you a head start in life, it’s grit that will get you over the finish line.

A 2013 article in Forbes magazine identified five characteristics of people who have grit.

  1. Courage – The ability to manage the fear of failure.
  2. Conscientiousness – Working tirelessly, trying to do a good job, and finishing the task at hand.
  3. Endurance – Having the stamina to achieve long-term goals.
  4. Resilience – The ability to remain optimistic and confident in the face of unforeseen problems.
  5. Excellence vs Perfection – Striving for excellence, not perfection.

The Forbes article also quotes from a 1907 speech by Theodore Roosevelt that illustrates the essence of true grit:

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strived valiantly; who errs, who comes again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly.

* * *

Finally, in a Psychology Today article, Michael D. Matthews, PhD, argues that neither talent nor grit alone will lead to success.

The message here is clear. Grit is indeed a critical factor in achievement. But it is best applied to tasks and goals for which you have the innate talent and interest to sustain growth. Engage in honest self-appraisal and identify what you have the physical and cognitive skills to be good at, then use your grit to fan the talent flame. Love what you are good at and be good at what you love. Your talent will only take you so far; you need grit to be great. And accomplishing difficult tasks provides a foundation for a life of meaning and purpose.

 

So there you have it. Talent and Grit. You need both to make the cut.

* * *

So TKZers: Have you ever taken a quiz to identify your talents? How would you compare talent and grit in writing? Which of the five characteristics of grit in this article do you most identify with?

* * *

 

Another Side of Sunshine: A Reen & Joanie Detective Agency Novel 

10-year-old Reen and her 9-year-old cousin Joanie have plenty of talent and grit, but is that enough to find the treasure hidden by the mysterious Mr. Shadow?

Click the image to go to the Amazon book page.

The Backwards Law for Writers

Posted on by

I stumbled across the subject of The Backwards Law by accident—a happy accident that led me to The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck. Excellent book that I devoured in two sittings.

The Backwards Law proposes the more we pursue something, the less satisfied we become. For writers, the constant pursuit of “more” causes us to feel horrible about where we are and what we’ve achieved. The harder we try, the less likely we are to succeed.

On the surface, it seems like the opposite of perseverance, doesn’t it? But it’s not. The Backwards Law goes much deeper than that.

Think of it this way:

  • Trying too hard to be creative or write something brilliant often leads to writer’s block, self-doubt, and a feeling of being disconnected from the work.
  • Only focusing on the end result—recognition, success, publication—causes unnecessary anxiety and pressure.
  • The fear of making mistakes or writing poorly will paralyze a writer and often will lead to abandoning the WIP.

“Wanting a positive experience is a negative experience; accepting a negative experience is a positive experience.” Mark Manson – The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck.

Alan Watts, the philosopher who coined the phrase, describes The Backwards Law as being in a lake. If you relax and put your head back, you’ll float. But the more you struggle and flail to try to stay afloat, the more you will sink.

Often our search for “more” has the opposite effect. It shines a spotlight on what we lack.

Life Examples

  • The more we cling to a loved one, the more they will feel suffocated and in need of space.
  • The more we obsess about accumulating money, the more poor and unworthy we will feel.
  • The more we pursue trying to feel happier all the time, the more we will reinforce this idea that we are fundamentally lacking and irreparable.

Do you even know what you want?

Sure, selling millions of copies of your book sounds great, but is that why you wrote it? Or maybe, you can’t define what you’re chasing. You just want more.

“Two reasons that you don’t really know what you want. Number one: you have it. Number two: you don’t know yourself, because you never can. The Godhead is never an object of its own knowledge, just as a knife doesn’t cut itself, fire doesn’t burn itself, light doesn’t illuminate itself.” ~ Alan Watts

In The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, Mark Manson tells the story of a talented young guitarist who was kicked out of his band in 1983, after they had just been signed by a record label. No warning. No reason given. No discussion. They woke him up and handed him a bus ticket.

After much self-pity on the ride home to LA, the guitarist vowed to start a new group that would be so successful, his old band would seethe with jealously. And so, with only that thought in mind, he worked tirelessly to find the best musicians. He wrote dozens of songs. Practiced day and night. Revenge became his muse.

Within two years, a record label signed his new band. One year later, their first record went gold. The guitarist’s name? Dave Mustaine, lead guitarist in the heavy metal band Megadeath, which went on to sell over 25 million albums and tour the world many times. Mustaine is considered one of the most influential musicians in the history of heavy metal music.

Sounds like the story has a happy ending, right?

Not quite.

The band who kicked him out was Metallica, which has sold over 180 million albums worldwide and is considered by many to be one of the greatest rock bands of all time.

Because of Metallica’s fame, Mustaine considered himself a failure. Despite all he’d accomplished, in his mind, he would always be the guy who got kicked out of Metallica and nothing more. Whether he realized it or not, Mustaine used Metallica’s success and popularity as his life-defining measuring stick. Even after all of Megadeath’s success, he could never be happy, because he based his self-worth and music career on something he had no control over.

This story perfectly illustrates The Backwards Law in action.

Accept imperfection and you’ll feel perfect. Accept loneliness and you’ll feel content alone. Accepting a negative experience is a positive experience. But fighting a negative experience means you’ll suffer twice.

  • When we stop trying to be happy, we’ll be happy because there’s nothing we need beyond what is.
  • When we stop trying to be rich or massively successful, we’ll live in abundance because we’re content with what we have and anything on top of that is a bonus.

Thus, the only way to have what we want is not to want it. And that’s what The Backwards Law teaches us.

Being aware of the workings of The Backwards Law doesn’t mean that we should never set goals, never have ambitions, or never chase our dreams. Rather, The Backwards Law teaches us not to be fooled by the idea that the pursuit of happiness (whatever that looks like to you) leads to happiness. When in fact, the opposite is true. And with that knowledge, we’re able to enter the blissful state of enjoying the journey.

“The mystery of life is not a problem to be solved but a reality to be experienced.” ~ Alan Watts

How do we get what we want without trying?

Depends on what we want. If we strive to write the best damn book we can, the following tips should help.

Mindful Writing: Practice mindfulness while writing. It’ll help you become more aware of your thoughts and feelings without judgment, allowing you to be more present in the moment.

Step Away: It’s okay to step away from the WIP to clear your head. Go for a walk. Take a shower. Read a book. Exercise. I do this all the time when I’m working out a plot issue. Nine times out of ten, the answer reveals itself as soon as I stop thinking about it.

Accept Imperfection: Give yourself permission to make mistakes in early drafts. It’ll allow you to experiment and explore different ideas without fear.

Stay Present: Enjoy the journey of bringing your idea to life. Have fun with your characters. Revel in that perfect sentence or paragraph you wrote yesterday, then continue on.

The Backwards Law for writers is about shifting from a place of striving and pressure to a place of flow and acceptance. 

By letting go of the need to control the outcome and embrace the process, we’ll unlock creativity and produce more authentic and fulfilling work.

Have you heard of The Backwards Law? It’s as true for writing as it is for life.

Moving and Writing

Posted on by

Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving. —Albert Einstein

* * *

I’ve mentioned over the past few weeks that my husband and I have moved to a new home. It’s been a long, hard effort, but now we’re in the new place and trying to regain some sense of normalcy.

One thing getting back to normal means is writing a post for TKZ. So now, I sit at my desk, surrounded by towers of boxes and ponder what I should write about while the aroma of fresh cardboard and packing tape wafts through the house. Since I do so love analogies about writing, there’s my subject: How are moving and writing related.

The Big Adventure

Moving starts as an adventure. Maybe it’s a new job or a better living situation or some other reason to change addresses. There’s a lot of anticipation mixed with a little anxiety. Lists are made, forms are ordered, lots of organization is put in place. Whatever the reason, the excitement builds as moving day nears.

Same with a new novel. A great idea suddenly crystallizes and you realize you have a theme for a new book. The best yet. You begin to draft out character sketches and a general plot line. You set up Scrivener for the new work and put together a project plan with a schedule. You stand at the mountaintop looking over the landscape and imagine the journey ahead.

The Trek Goes On … and On

If you’re lucky, you’ll hire a moving company to pack and move everything. But what’s the adventure in that? To keep the analogy with writing, you’ll have to do your own packing. You go through the house and decide what can be given away, sold, or stored. You order packing materials and spend weeks knee deep in boxes, bubble wrap, and permanent markers. But it’s taking longer than you thought, and the whole task of packing boxes has become hard work. You have to decide what to keep and what to let go. At some point, you ask yourself “Whose idea was this, anyway?”

Writing is a little less physically demanding. Day after day, you pack Scrivener with new scenes, and your creativity is firing on all cylinders. Finally, you’re deep into the story. Then you hit a wall, and you back up to look at what you’ve accomplished so far. It’s just a mess, and you have to decide what to throw away. You can keep everything, but then your new story will be a jumble of scenes rather than a carefully crafted book, so a serious pruning job is in order.

Persistence Pays Off

That’s when it hits you. Maybe this wasn’t such a good idea after all. But you’ve already invested heavily in the story or the move, so you keep going forward. Not quite as excited, but shoulder to the wheel. The message in your head is no longer “Woo-hoo,” but more like “Put one foot in front of the other.”

It seems like ages before those boxes are all packed or the chapters are written. The movers come and transfer all the furniture to the new place. You have a fully finished first draft. It still doesn’t look so pretty, but at least you’re beginning to see the story behind the jumble.

Revision

So now you move into unpacking mode, putting things where they belong, discarding boxes, and cleaning up. In a novel, this would be the final draft. Rearranging the chapters and rewriting.

The work is long and sometimes boring. But occasionally you’ll stumble onto some little artifact that makes you realize how nice the finished product will be. It takes forever to unpack, fit things into their new environment, and get the household in order.

Slowly, day by day, the pieces begin to fit together to form a cohesive whole. The house is set, the novel is written, and the job is done.

The End … for now

It’s time to sip champagne, take a short rest, and then get to work on marketing.

* * *

So TKZers: How do you deal with the confusion that surrounds moving or writing? Do you keep plugging away knowing everything will come out well? How do you celebrate when the big move or book release is over?

* * *

 

Spunky 10-year-old Reen and her shy, 9-year-old cousin Joanie never stop moving while they hunt for a treasure left by the mysterious Mr. Shadow. Along the way, they learn the value of persistence, teamwork, and fair play.

Click the image to go to the Amazon book page.

 

Characterization

Posted on by

Characterization – noun – a description of the distinctive nature or features of someone or something.

* * *

I’m reading The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris. I don’t read a lot of biographies, and although I’ve only finished a few chapters so far in this one, I so enjoyed the setup to Roosevelt’s character in the prologue that I thought it would be a good topic for TKZ.

The prologue is set on January 1, 1907 when thousands of people are waiting patiently in line to enter the White House to shake the president’s hand and wish him a Happy New Year.

Through the description of that New Year’s Day, Morris alternates between the story of the crowd inching its way toward the White House doors, and descriptions of Roosevelt’s behavior, personality, and impact on others.

Take this example:

“Roosevelt may be the fastest handshaker in history (he averages fifty grips a minute), but he is also the most conscientious, insisting that all citizens who are sober, washed, and free of bodily advertising be permitted to wish the President of the United States a Happy New Year.”

The author gives us a good look at the crowd, the weather, and the overall state of the nation’s wealth. He enjoys using quotes from Roosevelt’s friends and others to help us define the man, as in this quote from Joseph G. Cannon, the Speaker of the House.

“Roosevelt’s all right,” says Cannon, “but he’s got no more use for the Constitution than a tomcat has for a marriage license.”

Others were quoted as calling him a “faker and a humbug.” No less a personage than Woodrow Wilson said, “He is the most dangerous man of the age,” and Mark Twain declared Roosevelt to be “insane.”

On the other hand, one veteran politician noted that Roosevelt had “unquestionably the greatest gift of personal magnetism ever possessed by an American.”

Such diverse statements interwoven with evidence of Roosevelt’s popularity and his delight in the job of the presidency give us a three-dimensional person who is so much more than the textbook president who created national parks, succeeded in getting the Panama Canal built, and had the Teddy Bear named after him.

As the crowd snakes its way into the room where Roosevelt is greeting them, Morris describes the president’s physical impact on the visitors. He quotes English statesman John Morley as saying, “Do you know the two most wonderful things I have seen in your country? Niagara Falls and the President of the United States.”

Although Roosevelt is often remembered for his pugnacity, it was his diplomacy in brokering a peace between Russia and Japan that earned him the Nobel Peace Prize. He was the first American to win a Nobel Prize.

And Theodore Roosevelt endeared himself to me by this statement: “Reading with me is a disease.” He managed to read at least one book a day. His interests varied widely, and he was himself an author.

After pages of defining the man by his behavior and the opinions of others, Morris finally gets down to specifics about Roosevelt’s appearance.

“Were it not for his high brow, and the distracting brilliance of his smile, Roosevelt would unquestionably be an ugly man.”

Morris then dedicates several long paragraphs to that dazzling grin that was so famous “that envelopes ornamented only with teeth and spectacles are routinely delivered to the White House.”

And he doesn’t stop there. Speaking of Roosevelt’s “white and even” teeth

“… they chop every word into neat syllables, sending them forth perfectly formed but separate, in a jerky staccatissimo that has no relation to the normal rhythms of speech… His very voice seems to rasp out of the tips of his teeth.”

A colleague of Roosevelt’s described its effect. “I always think of a man biting tenpenny nails when I think of Roosevelt making a speech.”

The nuance continues through the long prologue giving us a 360-degree view of the optimism, energy, love of power, and determination of our twenty-sixth president as he drives through life full speed ahead.

Only at the start of Chapter One does Morris back up and begin to tell the history of the man.

* * *

Theodore Roosevelt was a larger-than-life historical figure, so describing the many dimensions of his personality may not be surprising. But reading Morris’s work has made me put some thought into descriptions of characters in my own writing. Direct and indirect characterization can be powerful tools to round out characters and give the reader an entertaining story.

* * *

So TKZers: How do you describe your main characters? Physical description, speech, behavior, opinions of others? How much time and nuance to you put into your characters?

* * *

Note: Once again, I’ll be traveling between old and new homes as we try to finalize this (very long) move. I’ll respond to comments as soon as I can.

 

Another Side of Sunshine

“The story excels at honoring the emotional realities of childhood without veering into sentimentality. It’s a smart, well-constructed mystery that values relationships over rivalry, process over prizes, and growth over glory. Fans of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler and The Westing Game will find familiar pleasures here, wrapped in fresh clues and grounded by a heroine who learns to trust her instincts—and the people around her.” —Prairie Book Reviews

Click the image to go to the Amazon book page.

Millennial Slang for Writers

Posted on by

A friend told me a millennial at work couldn’t understand the clock on the wall. I’ve heard many stories involving rotary phones and cursive writing, but the clock surprised me.

Even after GenXers explained the hour and minute hand, the young man still couldn’t tell time.

Made me wonder how physicians and specialists would change the screening test for cognitive deficits, particularly in neurological disorders and dementia.

If the patient doesn’t understand an analog clock, never mind be able to draw one, what object could providers substitute for the Clock Drawing Test (CDT)? Or would the CDT become obsolete?

Generational Differences

Generational differences crack me up, but I probably wouldn’t have researched Gen Z slang if I hadn’t been the recipient of a millennial rant about her dating woes — and felt about 100 years old by the end of our conversation.

All generations have their own slang. Back in the day, GenXers used wicked, awesome, mint, rad, fly, sick, and mad to indicate something’s cool. Some even used tubular, groovy, and funky. Millennials use dank, lit, drip, dope, and fire.

When I converse with the younger crowd, I can usually keep up by considering the context in which the slang is used. Not this time. My head spun during my latest conversation.

The young woman used words like:

Benched

DTR

Orbiting

Cloaked

Cuffing season

Breadcrumbed

Love bomber

After this baffling conversation, I looked up millennial slang and found several other words I’d never heard before. If you have a millennial character or a young person in your life, this list may help. Keep track of how many are familiar to you.

Romance writers, take note. 😉

Pocketing

When someone pockets you, they’re keeping your relationship secret from family and friends.

Benching

When one romantic partner likes the other enough to keep dating but not enough to have a serious relationship with them. The term comes from sports, where a coach might keep a player on the bench rather than letting them play in the game. In the context of dating, it means giving someone just enough attention to keep them interested without fully committing to a relationship.

DTR

Acronym for Define The Relationship. Gen Z prefers to ease into a relationship. The first stage is the Talking Phase, where potential romantic partners chat online or via text. The talking phase can last for weeks or months before anyone even suggests an actual date, which typically leads to a situationship. Because dating can be confusing as the couple grows closer, one partner might ask the other to Define The Relationship. Are they building an exclusive relationship that may someday lead to marriage? Or do they prefer to keep it casual and date other people, as well?

Situationship

I like this one. It’s clear and to the point.

Situationships occur when two potential partners have ongoing communication, and it’s acknowledged, either directly or indirectly, that they are interested in each other. Super casual and low commitment, it’s a gray area where the two lovers might act like a couple but haven’t explicitly labelled their situationship or agreed on exclusivity.

Sus

Short for suspicious. Something doesn’t sit well for one partner. Anything can be sus. It’s not exclusively for dating.

Ghosting

One partner disappears from the other’s life, but with a twist. In the mid-20th century, we’d ask a family member to answer the phone and say we were sleeping, in the shower, or not home. Then never return the call.

With the invention of the answering machine in the mid-to-late-20th century, we could screen calls by waiting to hear who was calling. In the late ’80s/early ’90s, it became easier to screen calls with caller ID. Today, because smartphones have a “read receipts” option, ghosting is also called R-bombing: You know the person has read your text, but they don’t reply.

Ghostbusting

A ghostbuster is someone who continues to text and call after being ghosted.

Haunting

When an ex won’t return your call or reply to a text but will keep tabs on you through your social media posts.

Orbiting

Orbiting is a bit like haunting but strictly digitally based. After ghosting you, the orbiter stays in your life by orbiting your social media world, liking posts and watching your Stories and/or Reels.

Caspering

This is the kinder way of ghosting someone. They tell their partner they’ll disappear from their life — essentially a breakup, just not in person.

Submarining

When someone has ghosted their partner, they re-emerge later as if nothing had happened. Similar slang is zombieing, because like a zombie, they come back from the dead and re-enter your world without warning.

Cloaking

The harshest form of ghosting, to be cloaked means your partner not only stood you up for a date with no explanation but also refuses to respond to your calls, texts, and has blocked you on dating apps and social media—anywhere you had previously communicated.

Cuffing or Cuffing Season

This refers to the phenomenon where people look to couple up or enter a serious, often exclusive, relationship during the colder months.

Breadcrumbing

Breadcrumbing is the new “leading someone on.” It occurs when someone gives another person just enough attention or communication to keep them interested, without any intention of committing to a genuine relationship. The term “breadcrumbing” comes from the idea of leaving a trail of breadcrumbs, giving the impression of progress or interest while the trail leads nowhere.

Love Bomber or Love Bombing

Love Bombing is used by individuals to gain control over their partner. It involves overwhelming someone with excessive attention, affection, flattery, and gifts early in the relationship to make them feel special and dependent. The aim is to create a strong emotional bond quickly, making it harder for the targeted person to recognize red flags or leave the situationship.

Fishing

Casting many messages out on various dating apps to see who bites.

Simp

A simp is the classic nice guy who will do anything for the girl he likes, only to be sanctioned to the “friend zone.”

Cushioning

Another dating strategy, where someone maintains a roster of potential romantic interests, or “cushions,” while being in a primary relationship. This practice is done to soften the blow or cushion the emotional impact in case the main relationship fails. It involves flirting, texting, or even casually dating multiple people without any serious commitment to them, providing a backup plan to fall back on.

Dry Dating

The days when young people relied on alcohol for liquid courage are long over with more millennials choosing to go stone-cold-sober on a first date, perhaps even for several dates.

Beige Flag

You’ve heard of red flags and even green flags, but a beige flag is the newest slang on the Gen Z dating block. It’s described as something that’s neither good nor bad but makes the other person pause for a minute when it’s noticed and is usually something odd.

Cookie-jarring

The opposite of benching, you see someone regularly, but she hasn’t Defined The Relationship (DTR). The reason is that she’s also secretly seeing someone else. You are being cookie-jarred in case the relationship with the other guy doesn’t work out.

Kittenfishing

A less severe form of catfishing, kittenfishing is when you’ve been fooled into believing the lies a potential date tells you about who he/she/they is. Lies are usually about age (using an old photo), job, height, etc. As soon as you meet in person, the truth is revealed.

Rizz

Rizz is defined as how successful someone is at attracting or flirting with a potential date due to their charismatic personality or silent charm.

Slow Fade

Like ghosting, but in slow motion. The slow fader first becomes less responsive to texts and calls, starts canceling plans, and eventually stops making new plans.

Curving

In Gen Z dating speak, curving describes the act of politely rejecting someone’s advances without explicitly saying “no.” Instead of directly rejecting the person, they respond in a way that subtly signals disinterest or avoids commitment, often through vague or evasive responses.

Catch and Release

Much like fishing, the playboy likes the thrill of the chase but is no longer interested once they have caught the object of their desire.

Serendipidating

This term combines the concepts of “if it’s meant to be” with “the grass is always greener.” Thus, serendipidating means you are putting off a date just in case someone better comes along.

Tuning

Flirting for the sake of flirting without any interest in any type of relationship.

Marleying

Coined by the dating site eHarmony, Marleying is when you are zombied during the Christmas season, specifically. The name comes from the character in A Christmas Carol, Jacob Marley, who haunted Scrooge. Evidently, according to the dating site’s survey, 1 in 10 singles have been contacted by an ex during the holidays.

Flexting

Flexting is defined both as the act of digital flirting as well as the act of “digital boasting.” A flexter exaggerates about who they are, what they do, or how they look. According to market research, men flext more than women, with 63 percent of women who date online saying they’ve met a flexter versus only 38 percent of men.

Peacocking

This is a courtship term used by animal behaviorists: To get a female’s attention, a male peacock displays its elaborate feathers (other animals do this as well). Peacocking means one person shows off to get another’s attention, dressing up in attention-grabbing clothes or colors, shows off musical talents, or throws around money.

Freckling

Think of freckling as a summer fling. As summer turns to fall and your freckles fade, so does your summer romance.

Mosting

Like love bombing, the moster only loves the thrill of the chase and the act of coming on strong. The moster will likely end up ghosting you once he or she has expressed their undying affection.

Devaluing and Discarding

A process used by toxic and abusive people, it’s a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde situation. The relationship is a roller-coaster of kindness followed by cruelty, abuse, and toxicity, followed by kindness again. During the relationship, they break down their partner’s confidence, then discards them, leaving them depleted and confused, wondering where things went wrong. First, he devalues, then he discards.

Hoovering

When a toxic or abusive person wants to get back into your life by offering an empty apology.

Flying Monkeys

A Wizard of Oz reference, a flying monkey is recruited by an abuser to help debase their victim. In the movie, the flying monkeys did the dirty work for the Wicked Witch of the West.

Fauxbae’ing

Fauxbae’ers pretend to be involved with someone when they aren’t even dating. It’s a 21st-century concept because the pretending happens online, over social media.

Stashing

Pretty much the opposite of fauxbae’ing, stashing is when you are dating someone, but they keep you a secret from their friends and/or family, and don’t post about you on social media.

Micro-cheating

Cheating… a little. Whatever that means.

Shaveducking

A young woman’s concern that her attraction to someone was simply because she liked his beard.

When I first read this one, it sounded superficial. But then, I realized I’ve been guilty of shaveducking. Hey, chemistry is a fickle beast. You meet a man with a beard. He’s had it for months, and you love his signature style. Then one day, he shaves and doesn’t look anything like the man you’ve been dating.

Sidebarring or Pubbing

When you’re on a date but spend more time looking at your phone than engaging with your date.

Thirst Trap

A thirst trap might involve one partner intentionally posting seductive or flirtatious photos on social media with the aim of garnering attention or arousing jealousy from their significant other. It could be a way to test their partner’s level of interest or to seek validation and reassurance about their attractiveness and desirability within the relationship.

How many did you know? What slang did you use back in the day? Do you use slang in your books?

If you have a Gen Z character, only use one or two slang words in dialogue. Never in the narrative. Caution: using generational slang will date your book and may confuse some readers. If you venture down this path, make sure the context is clear.

Multi-tasking

Posted on by

The secret to multitasking is that it isn’t actually multitasking. It’s just extreme focus and organization. —Joss Whedon

* * *

The term “multi-tasking,” sometimes called “multi-processing,” has become part of the lexicon of modern writers. Multi-tasking implies doing two or more things at one time.  Although it’s not possible to have the brain consciously working on two different problems at the same time, many of us say we’re multi-tasking when we think about the plot of our next book while doing brain-free activities like household chores, etc.

In the world of computers, the term “multi-processing” means there are two or more processors, now called ‘cores,’ working inside the computer. Neither of them is doing more than one job at a time. However, since there are multiple cores, they can accomplish multiple tasks in parallel.

The term “multi-programming,” however, describes a single processor that works on one thing at a time, but may swap tasks to be more efficient. For example, if one process has issued a print command, the processor may initiate the print, then return to the original process to continue or even start another process. It may appear that it’s doing multiple jobs at the same time, but it really isn’t.

So multi-tasking for writers where concentration is involved is more like multi-programming. We each have one brain and can only process one thing at a time, but we can swap tasks in and out to maximize our efficiency.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately because I’m in the midst of a multi-tasking hurricane. My husband and I are moving to another home, and even though we thought we had pared down all the stuff we own, we seem to have acquired more! I’m sitting in the middle of dozens of boxes, mostly books, with more to be packed. And then there are all the other things that need to be taken care of when moving from one place to another.

In addition to all that, my first middle grade novel, Another Side of Sunshine, launched a couple of weeks ago and requires some attention in the marketplace. The next book in the series is in the final stages of editing, and I’ll need to spend some time reviewing the entire manuscript and running text-to-speech on it. Then there’s the second book in the Lady Pilot-in-Command series which is partially written but needs significant hours of work. Email requires attention, and there’s always a need to post on social media, run a promotion, communicate with other authors, and of course, write a bi-weekly TKZ post.

In order to accomplish all these tasks and retain a modicum of sanity, I need to multi-program – swap from one task to another in the most efficient way possible. I’m finding that spending 30 minutes to an hour on one thing, then switching to another works pretty well. Refocusing turns my attention to the matter at hand and gives the boys in the basement a chance to continue working on all the other tasks.

I’ll be at the new home today and not sure how much connectivity I’ll have there, but I’ll check in when I can.

* * *

So TKZers: Even without moving from one home to another, there are dozens of writing-related tasks that we have to keep up with. How do you manage them all? Do you divide your day up into time slices? Any secrets you want to share with the rest of us?  

* * *

 

Cryptic clues, the elusive Mr. Shadow, and the promise of a hidden treasure combine to give the Reen & Joanie Detective Agency their first challenge. But they can’t multi-task. They have to solve the clues in a sequence, and they only have three days to find the treasure before time runs out. Can they do it?

Click the image to go to the Amazon detail page.

Name That Book

Posted on by

Bee to the blossom, moth to the flame; Each to his passion; what’s in a name? —Helen Hunt Jackson

* * *

I’ve been thinking a lot about book titles lately since my latest book was renamed by the publisher just prior to its release. More on that later.

Coming up with a title for your book may be one of the most important decisions you make. But how do you decide what’s the perfect name?

Blurb.com had a list of criteria that I grabbed from their website and added some of my own comments. A good title would be:

  • Concise (3-5 words) – Short titles stand out to readers. Long ones are harder to remember. On the other hand, consider The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society or The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared. They didn’t do too badly.
  • Intriguing – a title that will stand out and make readers want to buy your book. A few that I like are The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, The Remains of the Day, and The Art of Racing in the Rain.

The site also mentioned a good title would be:

  • Original
  • Informative
  • Easy to say
  • Attention-grabbing
  • Memorable

I considered some of the books I have loved and what their titles were:

  • To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
  • A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith
  • The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
  • West With the Night by Beryl Markham
  • The Woman in White by Wilkie Collins

All of these meet the requirement of being concise. With the exception of Huckleberry Finn, they are intriguing and original. They are also informative and easy to say. I’m not so sure about attention-grabbing. I guess that depends on the reader. Finally, I suppose a title is memorable only if the book is one you remember.

A couple of other attributes I’ve noticed in the book naming field:

  • Trendy – Remember how many books were published with the word “Girl” in the title?
  • Play on words – Popular with cozy mysteries.

* * *

Reading about the art and science of naming a book got me thinking about how I had come up with the titles of my five published novels. In the order published, they are:

The Watch on the Fencepost – That was the working title, but I wanted a catchy, clever name for the book. One day when I was about halfway through the writing process, my husband and I took a walk to talk about the title. I tried out a few possibilities (A Watch in Time, Death Watch, etc.), but nothing clicked with us. Finally, Frank said, “Why don’t you just leave it the way it is. It’s unique and intriguing.” So that’s what I did. And there’s a catch at the end of the book that emphasizes the title.

Dead Man’s Watch – The title refers to a watch that was taken off a dead man’s wrist. Finding the watch turned out to be an interesting problem that led to a surprising conclusion. I also liked the trendy “Dead Man” part of the title.

Time After Tyme – After the university librarian Mr. Tyme was found dead, a couple of teams of amateur sleuths spend their time looking for a culprit. This title was inspired by the use of word play in cozy mystery titles.

Lacey’s Star – I thought this title might be too prosaic. I considered All but the Brightest Stars, but opted for the simpler title because it refers to the final clue that leads to a murderer. I like to think that readers will finish one of my books and realize the relevance of the title to the story

That brings me to the fifth book, Another Side of Sunshine.

The working title was The Other Side of Sunshine, which is also the first line of the first clue in the story. Much of the book is a reflection on shadows (pun intended), so the title seemed perfect to me. However, the publisher didn’t want the title to begin with the word “The,” so she suggested Another Side of Sunshine. In the long run, I think it’s just as good, maybe better.

* * *

Speaking of changing titles, The Huffington Post had an article on classic books where the original title was changed. Here are a few:

  • Ernest Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises was originally titled Fiesta.
  • Somerset Maugham’s Of Human Bondage was originally titled Beauty from Ashes.
  • Margaret Mitchell’s Gone with the Wind was going to be Tomorrow Is Another Day, Not In Our Stars, Tote the Weary Load, or Bugles Sang True.
  • Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird was originally titled simply Atticus.
  • Carson McCullers’s The Heart Is A Lonely Hunter was originally titled The Mute.
  • John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men was originally titled Something That Happened.
  • Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice was originally titled First Impressions.
  • William Golding’s Lord of the Flies was originally titled Strangers From Within.

* * *

So TKZers: How did you determine names for your books? Do you have a favorite title of your books? Would you rename any of them if you could? What are some of your favorite titles from other authors? What do you think about the name changes in the list of classics? 

* * *

ANOTHER SIDE OF SUNSHINE
A Middle Grade Mystery Novel

The Reen & Joanie Detective Agency is open for business, and the first assignment is to find a treasure hidden by the mysterious “Mr. Shadow.” 

“Fans of From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler and The Westing Game will find familiar pleasures here, wrapped in fresh clues and grounded by a heroine who learns to trust her instincts—and the people around her.” —Prairie Book Reviews

Click the image to go to the Amazon book page.

Immersion Technique #WriteTip

Posted on by

Every character is the hero of their own story. Even the villain.

We’ve talked many times about the importance of fleshing out characters. This time let’s reframe the narrative for those who may not grasp the finer details of crafting a compelling villain.

It’s easy to tell a fellow writer to slip into the villain’s skin and view the world through their eyes—I’ve given the same advice—but for those who haven’t mastered characterization, it may not be enough.

  • How does one craft a killer when they’ve never committed a crime?
  • How can we champion a villain’s efforts with no real-world experience?

Sure, we can draw conclusions and make assumptions. Is that enough for readers?

  • Is there a way to pull from life experience, to really feel what it’s like to transform into somebody else?

Yes, there is. And it’s called immersion. Method actors use the same technique.

The dictionary defines immersion as “deep mental involvement.” It can also mean engagement, as in a mixture of how much you’re paying attention, how submerged you are in an experience, and how it affects you emotionally.

Immersion, whether real or imagined, taps into fundamental psychological principles like perception, emotional engagement, and the sense of presence. It involves a combination of sensory stimuli, cognitive engagement, and emotional resonance that creates a feeling of being completely absorbed in the experience.

Immersive experiences are rich and complex, drawing upon personal experiences, and engage with emotions through the manipulation of the five senses. They’re described as transformational, intense, sometimes hectic, and provoking.

What we see tells us a lot about the world around us, but what the body experiences is much more powerful.

How we immerse ourselves in a life unlike our own starts with walking in their shoes. Listen to the villain’s favorite music. Eat their favorite foods. View the world through their eyes.

  • What’s their culture like?
  • What’s their theme song?
  • What’s their religion, politics, and views on other hot topics?
  • Do they like the rain? Cold weather? Scorching hot sun?
  • Are they happy with where they live? Or have they been trying to escape the area for years?
  • What do they do for a living? Do they have buddies at work?
  • Are they body conscious and drink water all day? Or do they drink black coffee till noon, then switch to scotch?
  • Do they smoke? I’m not proposing you start smoking but you can pretend.

Even if the character’s actions rub against your values and beliefs, you must find at least one redeeming quality, or at least be able to empathize with a part of them.

Take Ed Kemper, for example. His mother was a severe alcoholic who favored his two sisters and never missed the chance to belittle him. Ed’s father, a World War II veteran, hated his wife. The couple divorced when Ed was still in grammar school.

Living with his mother was no picnic. She locked him in the cellar for days and/or weeks at a time—alone—a bare lightbulb hanging from a wire in the center of the dark and creepy space. Since the door locked from the outside, the only way out was through a trap door beneath the dining room table.

Trapped, Ed lay on the cold cement floor staring into the flame of the furnace. And it was then, he later told an FBI profiler, he saw the face of the Devil for the first time. That period of his life exacerbated his already fractured mind.

Later, at age 14, his father sent him to live with his grandparents in California. Interestingly, Maude (grandmother) was an extra in Gone with the Wind and a writer for Redbook McCall’s. Even so, Ed hated living there, calling his grandfather “senile” and his grandmother, well, this is how he described her…

“She thought she had more balls than any man and was constantly emasculating me and my grandfather to prove it. I couldn’t please her. It was like being in jail. I became a walking time bomb, and I finally blew.”

And blew he did, with the murder of his grandparents. Authorities sent him to Atascadero State Hospital, a maximum-security facility where doctors subjected him to various tests. One of which illuminated his genius IQ. They also diagnosed him as a paranoid schizophrenic.

In the six years he spent at the institution, he became one of the doctors’ favorite patients. They even allowed him to assist in conducting tests on other inmates, until 1969 when they released him into his mother’s care.

Big mistake. At 6 ft. 9 inches tall and 250 pounds, Ed was a mammoth with a genius IQ and a rage inside him.

After killing and decapitating six young women, he finally turned his wrath on Mother—the true source of his hatred—murdering, decapitating, and using her head as a dartboard. He also tore out Mother’s vocal cords and shoved them down the garbage disposal. When the disposal spat the gristly innards back out, he said to himself,

“That seems appropriate as much as she’d bitched and screamed and yelled at me over so many years.”

With his personal monster dead, Ed turned himself into police. He had no reason to kill anymore. He’s lived at California Medical Facility in Vacaville ever since. As a model inmate, he’s allowed to work as an audiobook narrator.

If Ed Kemper was a fictional villain, how would you make him the hero of his own story?

We’d need to focus on the abused little boy, alone and frightened, that still cried inside him and the personable guy who doctors adored. Does that mean I agree with what he did? Absolutely not. But as writers, we must find a way to justify his actions. We must. Otherwise, the villain will fall flat.

Now, don’t tell the reader what redeeming qualities you clung to while writing. Show them a tidbit here and there—just enough to pique curiosity and drive the plot—that make him feel more human. Or let the hero figure it out on their own.

If the villain is a series character, only reveal enough to intrigue and drive the plot. I did this with my serial killer named Mayhem. In three books, I showed him as a merciless serial killer. I also showed his love of animals, especially his sidekick Poe, the crow, and how tender he could be when caring for a wife stricken with ALS and his close relationship with his daughter and grandson.

Mayhem loves fine wine and is an expert chef, but he’s offended by bad language and numerous other things, especially rapists, cannibals, and child killers. Readers fell in love with Mayhem. Deeply in love. So much so, I had to transform him into an antihero in later books.

Readers understand, even champion, why he kills.

We did the same with Dexter. Who didn’t love to watch him murder other serial killers? Genius on Lindsay’s part.

Find a different angle for your villain. Copycats aren’t unique or memorable. Villains are some of the most difficult characters to craft because they do bad things. I also find villains and antiheroes the most rewarding to write.

The next time you craft a character vastly different from yourself, try immersion. It works for the entire cast, including heroes, sidekicks, foils, secondary characters, etc.

Chiastic Structure

Posted on by

Chiasmus – noun – a reversal in the order of words in two otherwise parallel phrases, as in “He went to the country, to the town went she.”

* * *

I recently encountered an episode of Thomas Umstadt Jr’s Author Media podcast entitled How to Write Enduring Best Sellers with the Two-act Chiastic Structure. I wasn’t familiar with the term “chiastic”, so I listened and learned a lot.

According to Umstadt

Western storytelling is typically based on the three-act structure. … However, the three-act structure is not the only story structure. There is an ancient story structure that dates back to the time of oral storytelling. This ancient structure is still popular in the East, yet it appeals to modern Western readers.

This two-act concept is the chiastic structure, and it can be used for sentences, poetry, stories, or even series. A famous example of a chiastic sentence was used by President John F. Kennedy in his inaugural address:

“Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.”

No matter what length, the chiastic structure follows an ABBA model and can be illustrated by two lines crossing like this:

In the Kennedy example, A = “your country” and B = “you.” The second part of the statement is a mirror image of the first.

* * *

But chiastic structure gets really interesting when it’s applied to stories. Check out this example from Wikipedia that shows the Biblical narrative of Noah and the Ark as it moves from A to the midpoint and then resolves from the midpoint back to A’.

Amazing!

* * *

I tend to think of story structure more as an arc. Rising action, crisis and midpoint, falling action and resolution.

However, after I read about chiastic structure, I realize I’ve used a modified form of it a couple of times in my books. In my first novel, The Watch on the Fencepost, the story begins when a young woman finds a mysterious watch on a fencepost which propels her on a quest to find the truth about her parents’ untimely deaths. Their deaths represent the loss of her closest relationships. The book ends when she finds another watch on the same fencepost that solidifies her relationship with a man who will become a special part of her life.

I always thought of this kind of writing as bookends to a story, but there’s a lot more to chiastic structure. I suppose the internal chapters have to mirror each other. I haven’t tried anything close to this, but it would be interesting to outline a story with that structure.

* * *

So TKZers: Are you familiar with chiastic structure? Have you used it in your own writing? Is it something you think you may want to use in the future?

* * *

Coming Soon!

Another Side of Sunshine
A Reen & Joanie Detective Agency Mystery

Spunky ten-year-old Reen and her shy nine-year-old cousin Joanie go on a quest to find a treasure hidden by the mysterious Mr. Shadow. Along the way, they discover new insights into friendship and fair play.