Floyd Hyatt

Writing advice from F. A. Hyatt.

F. A. Hyatt On The Belgariad

February 20, 2012 in Floyd Hyatt, Writing | 1 comment

Last week, Floyd Hyatt reviewed the Amber series. This week, it’s the 18-volume David Eddings set.

Light Fantasy Series Review
by F. A. Hyatt

The Series:

The Belgariad / The Malloreon / The Elenium / The Tamuli

David Eddings

Third person POV, largely. Sword and Sorcery- Del Rey 1982-1994

Description & Review

These four Epic Saga style book sets really need to be grouped as one Serial effort, as they chronicle an age-spanning quest in the balance between good and evil in the classic fantasy style, for one particular and evolving world.

I say evolving guardedly, for regardless of the millennium spanned by these four sets (18 large hard bound editions) you are dealing here with a world of armored knights and castles and magicians throughout.

One outstanding feature is the strong voicing of feminine and family ethic by the well-balanced female-to-male lead perspectives served up across the set. The sets are bound together by an ever-present pantheon of gods and nearly immortal or immortal avatars that wend their way through all. All deal with the rise of an evil god that just won’t go down for the last time or their henchmen, and evil’s temporary and repetitive defeat.

Behind it all are two stones that evidently used to run about making worlds until stranded on the mythic world of concern. Now, they play chess, with the world’s residents as pawns, and are behind the individual quests that comprise the four multi-volume epics. Passé as this sounds, the characters are interesting, the prose good, often funny, and the serial quests move along well.

If you are a fan of sword and sorcery, and feel left behind when finishing up a tale, with 18 books to carry on with, you will be in pig heaven here. While there is diversity between the volumes, between the series sub-sets (The Belgariad, The Malloreon, etc.), a certain sense of repetition, partially intended by the story line, exists that panders to just that principle – (if you liked that one, here’s more of the same.) None the less, these are well written, if light, fare, and each volume stands alone well enough to be read without being put off.

This is especially true of Polgara the Sorceress and its companion work, Belgarath the Sorcerer, which stand somewhat outside the main Epics as companion volumes. The lead characters change but slowly through the sets. The Sorceress Polgara and her father, the Sorcerer Belgarath shepherd their child charges through the first few, then a child goddess, Araphel accompanies Knight Sparhawk and his wife/queen through the rest.

Specifically of interest for lovers of the S&S Genre.

Thank you, sir! I’ve never read any of these, so I’m looking forward to diving in.

WRITING PROMPT: Does your main character like to read the same basic book over and over? Or the same book, like the Wilkie Collins character who only read Robinson Crusoe?

Tags: book reviews

Floyd Hyatt In Amber

February 13, 2012 in Floyd Hyatt, Guest Posters | 13 comments

The Amber Chronicles is one of my favorite series. Series’. Serieses. Bunch of books about the same people. I’m delighted and excited and, as Terry Pratchett would say, other things ending in “ited”, to have F. A. Hyatt weigh in on the subject.

Take it away, Mr. Hyatt!

The Series:
The Amber Chronicles
review by F. A. Hyatt

Dinosaur feathers in amber - NYTimes.com

The series follows the The lead character, Corwin of Amber in his quest to first, discover his own identity as a Prince of one of two empires that form the basis of the cosmic all. His alignment is with the ultimate, dimension spanning Empire of Amber, representing the principle of order, of which our work-a-day universe is just a small, and neglected shadow, a imperfect platonic replica. One of many. The opposing empire is Chaos, the seat of inverse principle. Both are real places, philosophies, avatars, and concepts all at once. The story follows Corwin’s attempt to claim the apparently vacated throne of Amber. In this quest, which spans the first six books of the set, we are introduced , slowly, to the politically active family of nine siblings whose juggling for position and political power plays out on a vast, multiple shadow (dimension/world) spanning stage, and his dealings with his rival siblings. The last four editions follow the life of Corwin’s son, who is left to deal with the debris of the titanic struggle, and find his own balance and place in the opposed empire of Chaos. Raised in Chaos, Corwin’s son shows us the other side of the duality, or empire pair, as he is manipulated, chased, and hounded to take the throne of the Empire of Chaos, a unwitting pawn in a political power play of great families.

This epic set, written in First person, constitutes one cohesive tale in the first six, and needs to be read in order. The last four, amount to a satellite story, that can be read independently, although they do tie back into the main set of six, extending the original story. Reading one set WILL send you to read the other, however.

Review:

Certainly one of the best First person epics, written by a well practiced master of the style, the story is engaging from the first page of the first book to the last sentence in the final volume. There are no weak volumes, no repetitive prose, and strong, engaging characterizations with very few exceptions.

Surprisingly for such a long work, the reader is carried forward through the story at a dead run. You develop a sense of the scope of the story right along with, and at the same pace as, the main character, which invites a deep involvement with the lead persona, that leads through the course of the first book, to a solid feel for the world Zelazny has built. The gradual introduction of the main characters keeps the interactions fresh and the action varied. The inventiveness of the devices used, and the colorful worlds developed, are well used to carry forward the plot and action presented. An almost perfect meld of adventure, action, political drama, sibling rivalry, growth, and magic, it is hard to fault this series on any front. To read this series is to dream of Amber….

The final four book set carries forward the first person prose style of R.Z, but applies it to his son, Merlin. One of the wonderful things about the whole set is that it assiduously avoids placing its lead characters in the position of hero of good or evil, rather, they struggle within the framework, a polarized environment which tries to reach out and control these independent lives. The interplay of human foibles in control of vast power and conflicting values form the driving core of this adventure.

The last four books bring this home very strongly, introduce a second set of equally powerful characterizations and show us the political and personal struggle from the opposite side of things. The lead characters Corwin and, later, Merle, or Merlin, are very similar, but as father and son somewhat forgivable, and the human and engaging personalities they are given is irresistible and believable. Recommended.

Much as it pains me to contradict Mr. Hyatt, I have to disagree with that last sentence. It should be: WAY recommended. Well, okay, the Merle books do bring negative numbers to the equation, so maybe a simple Recommended is appropriate, if you factor those in. “To read this series is to dream of Amber….” Well said, Mr. Hyatt, well said.

If you want to know more about the world of Amber, here is the Wiki on it.

WRITING PROMPT: Write a character who is fascinating, charming, and compelling, who has a child who looks and acts the same way but is boring and irritating.

Tags: book review

Guest Poster Floyd Hyatt on Seminal Series

February 6, 2012 in Floyd Hyatt, Writing | 18 comments

Kindle sales seem particularly driven by series sales, with many readers reluctant to buy an author who doesn’t have a list of titles for follow-up reading. Many authors are marketing with this in mind, giving away the first of a series in hopes that readers will like it and pay for subsequent titles in the series.

But we’ve all been series fans. I always looked forward to finding another Freddy the Pig book, then another Nero Wolfe book, then another Lynn S. Hightower Alien Blues book and now another Marjorie Liu and another Jim Butcher.

So I’m very happy to present a series of posts from F. A. Hyatt on:

General Reviews: Seminal Series Works
F.A.Hyatt

It seems as though the trend for the last couple of decades has shifted to serial novels in Fantasy and S/F, although maybe that’s just me talking. The time was, when more authors wrote stand alone (or at least not true serial) novels, unless publishing for pulp era magazines.

We stood cash in hand , awaiting the next jaunt of imagination from our favorite Author. Although the serial, the trilogy, the continuing epic, have always been with us, It seems to have taken on a heightened presence in modern publications. It’s therefore only proper, that some description of these on-going multi-volume offerings be attempted.

I am going to take a historical approach, and start by looking at a handful of them, mostly familiar to all, that I feel have been seminal in laying the foundations of this trend. When I mention serial, I am talking about books that span more than a trilogy, not cliff hanging parted out stories. This because, donno, what do you call a sixteen book epic? A sesidecimology?

The attempt will be descriptive, and opinion driven, but hopefully of some use to those yet unexposed, who hesitate to begin reading what could be considered a commitment to a long chain of classic purchases. We will be looking at the Genre, Point of view, general topic, and the ability of the writer to sustain a constant sense of development across the span of each series. Can the included works be read stand alone? Is the reading experience consistent across the series? Do the characters change or stay the same through-out? Inquiring minds want to know. This will of necessity be a series of articles: I will start off with light fantasy, so consider this part one of, however many get formatted for blog presentation per time.

Light Fantasy

I have a particularly warm spot in my heart for these efforts. Beyond Robert Howard lies a great body of work that have the power to immerse the reader in the life, environment, or trials of an individual or set of characters. Precursors of Harry Potter and such, they are not juvenile fiction, and the best can take on either aspects of a good involved mystery, follow the growth of a character, or attempt to resolve involving philosophic, or dogmatic struggles.

Next week: The Amber Chronicles

WRITING PROMPT: What was your favorite series when you were growing up? Do you have a favorite series now? Does either series have any influence on what you write?

Tags: series books

Guest Poster Floyd Hyatt Interviews a Mind

January 16, 2012 in Floyd Hyatt | 1 comment

Regular guest (if that isn’t an oxymoron) F. A. Hyatt sent me this intriguing self-interview. At least, I think it’s a self-interview. It’s always possible he has a mind on his something as well as something on his mind.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you F. A. Hyatt:

Q: Do you assume that Science Fiction leads us to discovery, that it really predicts the inevitability of man reaching the stars, finding intelligent life, a life for man abroad in the cosmos?

A. That is three, possibly dozens of questions, at once. I think SF has the same cache’ as philosophy does. In fact, philosophers have used the genre to illustrate their ideas. Notably, the existentialists, but they are not alone in that. SF delves, as philosophers do, more than it discovers stuff.

Q: Yes, but again, about the prediction element SF is credited with?

A: Science fiction often takes on the basic cloak of science–the hypothesis, and generates visions that stem from considering what might support one, or refute one, then explores how that might affect what people do. The stories are often very human stories of emotional, personal, or ethical nature, same as are explored in any novel format, usually expressed against the challenge new situations bring. This is sometimes couched as “What If” writing.

As far as prediction and discovery go, I don’t think there is any such thing as a bad hypothesis, or prediction. Science learns as much from disproving them as it does from affirming them. Most SF attempts to start from science that is known or already under study and takes the leap to new guesses from there–which is, in fact, one of the processes we use to advance science. So, it is not odd to find that a percentage of these test out well, over time. No. I do not think it is predictive, but it is obvious that some amount does become affirmed as science moves forward. Both start by extrapolating from what is known. SF is very good at mimicking this process.

Q: So, about all that Alien encounter literature, life in space?

A: Intelligent life? Alien people zooming through space? We haven’t found as much as a microbe off-planet so far. Without the bizarre events that lead to what is called Earth 2, there would not be life here. When we got our moon, a stable 27-degree tilt, a 24-hour rotation, and an enlarged liquid iron core, life became feasible on Earth. These conditions were spawned in a chain of freak circumstances, not by “normal” planetary development, if there is such a thing. Still, the universe is a big place.

Perhaps that is more the point. If life is a one-in-a-trillion happenstance, as many believe likely, humanity is less likely to encounter it elsewhere. The odds vs distances involved, start to massively overshadow those of an individual winning a state lottery, or being struck by lightning. Between stars, the distances are so huge as to be sheerly theoretical, insofar as the human mind can comprehend. The amount of energy alone, never mind the sheer number of years, it would take to reach the most likely candidate is incomprehensible under the rule of physics as we know it.

Regardless of tech, it all comes down to energy. We need to have access to a lot more of it than we do. Theoretical Calculus suggests that to “fold space”, even on paper, costs about all the available energy in the universe to do–once. Bottom line, even if you could do it once, there would be no universe left afterward to explore, you would have burned it all for fuel.

We are the aliens–we may always be the aliens. Look at what is needed to inhabit even the most condign other bodies in our solar system, or even stay in space for more than a few weeks.

It looks to be our biology that must be radically changed. Conditions elsewhere have different ecologies. More so than any terraforming or special environment could be expected to overcome in a reasonable term. Likely, we would have to change to fit their ecologic reality. Bones and immune systems that weak gravity does not destroy. DNA and cell coding which radiation does not ruin. Tolerances for gases, temperatures, pressures, well outside the current human range.

We tend to forget that we are custom cogs in the clock of a very strange planet, highly specialized to do well here, not elsewhere. If we ever do meet bug-eyed aliens in our far future, the highest probability is that they would be relatives–offspring of genetically altered ancestors. This, just to establish permanent settlements in-system, which would happen long before anything interstellar occurred. But, anything is possible.

Q: So, the ultimate purpose of man in the universe?

A: Now you’re getting the idea. It’s about philosophy, in the end, isn’t it? Not when, but what if. Throwing dice, hope, curiosity, reaching out for things further away than our arms are long. That’s the essence of what we are. We will dream on that question, will write about it. We will call it speculative fiction, science fiction, Philosophy, whatever. Who knows what the future brings? Were you there?

Have you peered into it like Nostradamus? Then, maybe you are a science fiction writer.

Mr. Hyatt sent an excerpt illustrative of what he calls “this rant”, which I will share on Sample Sunday.

WRITING PROMPT: Someone who has never been able to see the future suddenly can. Is it the far future? His or her own future or someone else’s? Is the ability permanent or temporary? Are they the shadows of what will be, or what may be only?

Tags: life in space

Guest Post by F. A. Hyatt on POV

January 9, 2012 in Floyd Hyatt, Guest Posters, Writing | 18 comments

POV, of course, stands for Point Of View or “Whose head are we in?” Here’s what regular guest poster Floyd Hyatt has to say about this element of fiction:

POINT OF VIEW
What you must know
by F. A. Hyatt

I have been reading several misleading (not to say ridiculous) “Guides” to Point Of View. While the subject can get complex, the important basics about Point Of View are simple.

Point Of View indicates who the storyteller or narrator is in a particular work, or fraction of a work. That is, whose NARRATIVE PERSPECTIVE the story is told from. It is uncommon for this perspective to change during a course of a novel. Usually, the entire work will be effected within at least the same CLASS of perspective, and common editorial advice is not to change perspective unless needed, nor more than once per chapter.

This is to keep the continuity of the reader consistent, and keep from popping him out of the story. It is not a rule of English grammar; it is a style convention of novel and story writing. The general classes of POV are below:

First Person POV

The narrator is some agent detailing what he sees. The pronoun ‘I’ features here: I said, I looked, It was apparent to me- these are all hallmarks of First Person Point Of View. Narrative voice may be that of an observer, or of a character, (lead character or not; in the Great Gatsby, by Fitzgerald, the first-person narrator is Nick Carraway and not the title character Jay Gatsby himself). The fundamental feature is that this puts the reader behind only one set of eyes. Narration may only disclose what is put before the narrator’s view, or reported to the narrator, and tagged as such. For example, a first person narrator would not be able to recount what is around some blind corner he is not in a position to see, or to report on what is behind a door that is closed to him. It cannot skip from head to head , to disclose the thoughts of others. (Unless of course the narrator is say, introduced as a telepathic being, but in order to be still considered First Person Viewpoint, this would have to be rigidly limited, and the character voiced very strongly — this variation is sometimes called First-person Omniscient view.)

Second Person POV

This is the point of view used in text adventure games and children’s Halloween tapes. “You walk into a room. You see a jar on the table. You begin to sweat.” It is the voice of a narrator who walks behind only one person, and reports to that person his actions, or visualizations. Because it is a clinical and abstract viewpoint, its place in the novel is very confined, and for good reason, not normally employed.

Third Person POV or Omniscient POV

This type of narrator can flit from character to character, describing scenes viewed by multiple characters, detailing their private thoughts and emotional states, even if not apparent to other onlookers. It can report on the contents of locked chests, the positions of assassins waiting hidden behind closed doors, and so forth. This is usually formal narrative. Rarely can this type of narrator be characterized. The voice is therefore largely neutral. It does not normally belong to a character, save when the narrator is cast as a storyteller, ‘Once upon a time’ fashion. It is a neutral commentator in the root form. It allows an author to detail actions that happen simultaneously in different story locations and to different characters from one consistent viewpoint.

Novels are commonly written in third person, some in first, almost none in second.

There are several variations on these classes, often called VOICES. There is the Unreliable Narrator voice, for instance. – A narrator whose reporting is skewed by prejudice or belief, and who the reader understands to be making narration colored, biased, misinterpreted or wrong in perspective.

Choice of Perspective, or POV

One approach is to decide if your story requires knowing of simultaneous events occurring in different places. If it does, First Person POV would mean having to use multiple narrators, possibly changing the narrating character too often. This causes reader disruption, what is called “Head hopping”. Alternately, it could mean writing much of the story in past tense, with the POV character reminiscing about things he learned of only later. Often this could require frequent scene changes or short chapter sections. Third or Omniscient would commonly be the best choice of POV for such a work.

If you are writing a text adventure (quite out of fashion in gaming, these days) then you will undoubtedly be writing in second.

If your story can be easily written from behind one set of eyes, such as is common in romances and detective stories, where identification with one hero or heroine is paramount, or where most events come before, or can be arranged to come before, one person, then First Person POV can be a plus, making for an easier identification with a particular character. Keep in mind that novels might be planned ahead to take advantage of multiple first person POV’s by making each Narrator’s section long enough to prevent head hopping.

The author should be aware that POV does not affect the necessity to be tense aware. Nor should the author confuse tense with POV. Besides POV, most novels tend to be consistent in narrative TENSE, as well. Books that begin in a very immediate, present tense, will attract comment if the voice passes into another, more reflective tense. Tense, unlike POV, is also a matter of grammar however, and must be adhered to as the prose dictates.

POV does not affect dialog. Dialog is what is quoted, or spoken aloud, regardless of who reports it, or what POV a story uses. In terms of dialog, think of the narrator’s commentary as an unquoted, disembodied voice announcing the commercials on the Price is Right. Always consistent in tone throughout the show, but not necessarily involved in the game, or with the character’s interjected quotes. Even when writing in pure First Person POV, spoken character dialogs including the POV character’s dialogs, must be quoted,(“”) set off in their own paragraphs, and tagged as needed to identify the speakers.

Below is just one of any number of easily available descriptions of Point of View, and included here because it links to very good lists of classic works performed in each of the common styles, and validates to some extent, this summary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative_mode

Terminology Generally:

It is common, in a critique, to point out unusual shifts in the narrative mode, or POV. While important, be aware that not every reviewer will be a informed adviser in regard to POV. One common mistake is to routinely confuse TENSE with VOICE, or either with POV. Some may even confuse a change in writing style (another kind of problem) with a POV shift. In order to take advantage of review, it is important to know what these root terms are, and how they are used, in order to evaluate what corrections to your work are needed.

Look up these terms and their full descriptions, and be sure you understand them, before abiding by the “will” of your critiques. Then you will be more enabled to use the opinions garnered to correctly guide your work, and offer better help to others.

Critiquing POV:

The point of establishing a consistent narrative, or storyteller, is to provide clarity for the reader, to minimize logical inconsistencies, and provide an uninterrupted, believable reading experience. Some authors can achieve this without severe POV interpretation. There are many sub-categories of POV, and many “gray” area uses overlap. I am not overly mechanical when considering POV. My standard is, “Does it work in the story?” Does it bother, or confuse me? If not, I may point out the mechanical problem, but admit it didn’t affect my experience of the story. Give a corrective example when citing a POV error.

These tips are offered to help establish some common basis for traffic between critique participants, not to limit the breadth of a critique. Look at them as a sort of basic vocabulary that can help you to better communicate what you see in a work to others.

Thanks, Floyd! I’m sure you’ll have comments and questions, as always. Readers, if you leave a question or comment, please allow Mr. Hyatt a few days to respond. I promise you, he will.

WRITING PROMPT: Write a paragraph from First Person, Second Person and Third Person.

Tags: point of view, the writing process

Guest Post by Floyd Hyatt – Humor – Club Uniform

December 19, 2011 in Floyd Hyatt | 6 comments

Floyd wants you to know that this doesn’t represent ANY group of which he is a member, has ever been a member, knows a member, or will ever be a member. So now you know. I must say, though, that it sounds like he’s eavesdropped on a Southern Indiana Writers Group meeting or two.

CLUB UNIFORM
by F. A. Hyatt

Alex, today’s President-By-Default, banged the desk with his favorite multipurpose coffee mug/gavel/paperweight.

“Order! Order!”

He noted with satisfaction at least three members looking up from their manuscripts. Plus, almost a real quorum of writers had shown up this time. It was possible that a tentative resolution might get discussed, if not actually voted on and passed. Over all, he was pleased.

Carol blinked at his empty gavel. “Are you out of coffee, Alex?”

“No. Well, yes, but I can’t fill my mug until I’ve brought the meeting to Order.”

“Oh. Club rule?”

“I’d spill it.”

“When do we swap critiques?”

“In a bit, there’s some business first.”

“Can you just get on with it?” David groused crossly, “I skipped a blog tour for this. Why couldn’t we have had this Pow-Wow online instead?”

Alex looked uncomfortable. “Because we were to look at ideas for Club uniforms. We texted about that earlier. Marc had some designs to share.”

“I wasn’t part of that!”

“Ah. It’s text – online. In your mailbox. Two weeks ago? Anyway, Marc-”

Josie raised her hand, so Alex interrupted himself, nodding at her. “Yes?”

“There’s our Tee-shirt logo online, why not just make some tees up?”

“Not all of us are comfortable with that idea,” sneered Carol. She nodded toward Donald, whose chest slopped down onto a ski ramp midriff, and poked a finger towards Arline whose weight, in her middle age, was prone to accumulating across the chest.

“Why this interest in uniforms at all?” piped John, finally looking up from scribbling notes on the short story he had brought.

“There’s that Convention? Door prize of 500 bucks and two free full seminar scholarships for the first club attending with all members in uniform? Since it’s right here in town, -We all decided we could attend, and…”

“Bah! Marc didn’t even show up. Anyway, we don’t have a club uniform. We’re an online group. Define uniform, in our context,” bawled Floyd.

Alex thought for a moment. “Erm, that’s an idea, actually. How about we define the club uniform in the Charter as what we normally wear while writing? Then we can claim the prize without all this fuss!”

“I write in my briefs,” piped Reginald.

“Bathrobe,” interjected Carroll.

“Ditto,” snickered Marc.

“Just whatever I have on from work– I write soon as I get home,” mused David.

“Mah Teddy,” drawled Darla, the romance writer of the group. She produced a languid, sly grin, batting her eyes at Alex.

Alex blinked.

“Motion seconded,” howled John, “Lets pass on this so we can get on to our Crits!”

“I don’t think…”

“Motion passed, whatever it was,” waved Susan, just now putting away her cell phone. “Can we get on with the crits now? I have to pick up my son from soccer in an hour. Next time just use the site posts to discuss this stuff, Alex. You know writers can’t be bothered with anything not in print.”

He claims this is fiction. What do you think?

WRITING PROMPT: Write the same basic three-line paragraph in the style of each of these writers.

Tags: guest poster, humor, the writing life

Guest Poster, Floyd Hyatt – Online Critique Group Part 2

December 5, 2011 in Floyd Hyatt | 8 comments

Part one of this essay appeared in a previous post.

When setting up, consider:

Members do not need access to the membership roster, as this only invites spamming. Tick items that improve the privacy of your member information. Each member can easily decide on his own to share or not share whatever information he chooses. While Moderator rights need to be reserved for your Moderators, if any, just ensure members have rights to post, to manage their file spaces, and up/download ability.

Do write a mission statement to head your site. Be plain and direct in it about:

The rules of etiquette.

What activities your group will encompass.

What age group, Genre, and work lengths you will support.

Other Documentation.

Crit sites aren’t all about rules, regulations and Policy. However, preformatting a few simple documents to keep in a maintenance folder right off will save you time and bother later. Consider a formatted (and polite) dismissal letter; a stock welcoming letter; perhaps a simple guide to creating personal sub-directories and getting around on your site, what file formats are best to put up work in, and so forth. Not all writers are computer hackers, ex-technicians, etc. nor should they need to be.

General Considerations:

Members should be encouraged to use the list, talk to each other, understand who their reviewers are, and their proclivities. Be prepared to exorcise members who do not understand the purpose of your group.

Groups are not Blogs, and the members must be able to work together and have a focus, or it will quickly go silent, or become a general chat site.

The Culture

Be sure members understand what polite means regarding critique etiquette, if not a particular format. Members need to understand that rewriting or ghostwriting others’ work, or just panning / lauding it, does not constitute any kind of critique. Corrections or suggestions need to be neutrally presented and suggestions tagged as to type, whether opinion, grammar, spelling, formatting, style or preferences. (see the article previously posted on crit techniques here) Authors should not have to be affronted by another’s attempt to change the individual growth of personal style, or be castigated for experimenting. It is OK to express an opinion, but mark opinions as such. Be sure your members thank every criticizer for each effort. It’s sweat equity, just as if a neighbor decided to mow a lawn for someone, out of the goodness of their heart. A good Idea is to make tit-for-tat critique a firm policy in your mission statement and stick to it.

All groups will need a little janitorial work from time to time. Be sure to designate a moderator as soon as possible to help members out. Encourage members to place useful links up in the link library area, and check these from time to time to be sure they are correct and work.

Public or Private?

Private. Period. Work held within a non-public group is not accessible by Googling, so forth, and is therefore not at risk of exposing work to copyright or sale problems, sex advertisers, trolls, fly-bys, so forth. Besides, ‘Public’ groups tend become fright-mares within days, and unsuitable for any serious purpose. Having only ten participating and motivated members is preferable to having a thousand trolls, advertisers and lurkers, so you do not need to “Go Public” to attract a good mix of active, mutually useful, participants. If your site is online to advertise, then of course, the opposite may be the better option, but you will not get much work done there, and everything posted will need watching.

Tick the maintenance Item that places New members on temporary moderation. This will allow you to preview what they wish to post, until you are happy they will be a good community member. You, or your moderator can rescind this feature for the member at any time.

Otherwise, dictate nothing, and be happy to have helped provide a stable and useful tool for your community.

Thanks again, Floyd! More of Floyd’s posts can be found by hovering over the ~Writing tab on the page list just below the banner picture at the top of the page, and clicking on the Floyd Hyatt link that drops down.

WRITING PROMPT: Rewrite the story of Jack and Jill in your own style.

Tags: guest poster, online critique groups

Guest Post by Floyd Hyatt – Online Critique Group Part 1

November 28, 2011 in Floyd Hyatt, Guest Posters | 14 comments

F. A. Hyatt, veteran of online critiquing, has sent a wonderful post on how to set one up. Here is Part 1:

Why Me?

The impetus to start your very own online writing circle is usually Manifold. Regardless of the availability of Writing Clubs in your area, having a small group of concerned and participating writers available online is its own blessing. Personal pride, of course, does not enter into it, and the ability to participate with other writers at liberty 24/7 rather than once a month or whatever, is irrelevant–sure enough. Plus, Yahoo groups are free of charge to Yahoo members. The process of creating one is accessible from the Yahoo main page, under “Groups”. It is well documented, and simple, So I won’t deal with most of that here.

However, the fact of group management and the idea of creating one, differ – somewhat.

First off, there are some mechanics. Although Group sites provide a format and some tools, these are general, if not remedial. Your group will need a structure specific to the needs of active writers. Do not assume the members will organically create a framework as they participate, or you will end up with a welter of difficult to manage and incompatible structures and site litter; I.E., a mess. Under the left side “Files” menu item, set up an area to contain folders for your writers. This is done by creating a Members File folder in that area. Have your members each establish their own work folder within the folder you create there. (Yes, you can have folders inside folders, just like on your PC) Ask that they place (upload) their Works-In-Progress into the folder they create.

The member’s file folder directory should look like a list of names at that point, with no documents peppering the folder directory itself. Each writer can then add, delete or change the work they store in these areas, and collect critiques in them, as they see fit, without dropping files at liberty hither and yon.

In fact, it is a good idea to establish a directory area for every aspect your club engages in. A review area to collect member reviews, an area to post announcements of author releases notices, whatever activities your site will specialize in. I find using the list’s general post area for any of this a bad idea. Usually work gets completely un-formatted in attempting such use – extremely bad for critique. Instead, use the post area for member Yak, as was intended. Besides, after going to the effort of uploading a document, who wants to have it available to the club for only a few hours until it scrolls down into oblivion? Be sure members have full rights to manage their own folder areas. This will save your assigned moderators (and you) a lot of maintenance work. All these setups are accessible from the main screen “maintenance” prompts, that appears magically on the owners and moderators menus when visiting the site. If you are currently a member of a Yahoo Group, you likely will not see these items, as you are not the Owner or a Moderator.

Here is Mr. Hyatt’s open group:
Established – for Serious and Casual writers, since 2007
Plotters of Dreams

WRITING PROMPT: Write about a critique group in which one member argues against any suggested revision and another member tries to incorporate every suggested revision, even if they’re contradictory. Your mission is to be neither of those members.

Tags: critique groups, guest writer

Guest Post – Floyd Hyatt – Second Coat of Paint

October 17, 2011 in Floyd Hyatt, Guest Posters, Writing | 5 comments

Unless he sends me more (hint, hint), this is the last of the posts given to me by the fabulous Floyd Hyatt. I wish he had a web site I could recommend, but he says he’s too busy writing and critiquing to maintain a web site. Hmmmm…. Is there a lesson there for me? …Naaaaah!

Overall Visions of the Critique Process.

Second Coat of Paint, Paint, Paint…

F. A. Hyatt

Commonly, novel writers are told to get the story down on paper first, and then revise. This is, I’ll admit, only partially the way I work. Perhaps my outline was vague, or I found too many things in the world-build to explore. Maybe I am just a poor example of a writer. (I like to think every writer modifies the basics a little, so maybe I remain ‘under the curve’ of what’s average, in this respect.) In either case, I will submit chapters for critique while still working on the first draft.

I begin with a story outline or arc, and juggle my way through to the story’s end. I stay concerned mostly with line edits, but pay heed to my criticizer’s commentary on logic, cadence, and characterization. When the draft is finished, I like to try it out on a few beta readers, who tend to look more at the whole, and provide general comments. In my experience, this can take a while.

During this process, and as the reviews come back, I look at things like:

*Secondary story arcs.
Secondary arcs provide me an opportunity to deepen character development, adding interest and breadth to the story. No story should be without some of these. When going to the circus, you generally expect to see more than one elephant, clown, or high-wire artist. The concern is, that my sub-plots advance the story. I want to deepen the reader’s understanding of the character’s motivation or personality, and provide drama. When reading a book, you expect some story depth. I know that piloting my lead character along like a train on a track makes for a boring book. There need to be cracks in the arc’s roadbed. Often, this opens opportunities for interesting secondary story arcs. I layer in these, mindful of the above expectations.

*Shuffling the deck.
The logical Progression of my masterpiece might, or might not, be improved by moving some scenes around. This is a good time to try that. It’s also a good time to review the action ramping (I covered this in “The Action Ramp, Bane of New Writers” before)

*Opening hooks, titles, forwards or prefaces.
No matter what my original intentions were, I often end up rewriting or changing the opening hook, and deciding on what preface material, if any, is needed. Needed? Yes. Looking back on the full story as writ, tells me how to reinforce or highlight my opening, and how much (if any) of my first chapter should be cut, and what else needs editing to support the theme smoothly.

*Butchering
Cut? Yes, cut. All that glorious prose, that in the end does nothing but slow my plot down, or mislead the reader. Like a parking lot attendant, the opening points the direction my story will take, or it doesn’t. There is no better time for me to evaluate this then when the first draft manuscript is on the table. I remind myself that a lot of movie footage ends up on the cutting room floor. In writing novels,the process is the same, and part of a writer’s skill set. Hanging on to that rationale, I cut with the zeal of a butcher; hack, slice, dice and shuffle until the road is smoothed, the tarmac repaired.

*Pushing the reader
Do my chapter endings push the reader forward? Now is a good opportunity for me to hang a few cliffs, and make sure there is an unanswered question that encourages turning the page.

Another round, anyone?
The result of all this, gets me ready for a second round of line editing and beta reading. Now that the tale is reconfigured, it needs to be evaluated again. With luck, this could end as a light sanding and touch-up, though in my world, that is seldom the case. Usually, the manuscript comes back just as blue-penciled as the original draft. Meantime, several other improvements have come to mind, so usually the “final” draft needs at least another round, before a decent product comes of it.

The better you get at this process, I am told, the quicker you can get off this particular carousel. However long the ride, eventually I shoot the engineer and move on to the next project.

Thanks, Floyd! I always learn so much from you!

WRITING PROMPT: Write a character who doesn’t know when to stop tweaking something–a story, a recipe, a painting, a business presentation, a costume.

Tags: the writing process

Guest Post by Floyd Hyatt – The Action Ramp

September 12, 2011 in Floyd Hyatt, Guest Posters, Writing | 2 comments

The Action Ramp – Bane of new writers

Adventure, Sci Fi, Fantasy, all feature one plot device that literary works can sometimes skip: the need to progressively increase the action levels throughout the work.

The ability to properly build tension and excitement over the course of a tale makes or breaks more new writers’ efforts than almost any other story feature in fiction. To succeed, the main character of a fiction work needs to face increasingly more difficult challenges within the tale. Stories must progress from the initial whispers of suspicion to involvement in full blown conflict, to resolution of some kind. From minor emotional upsets to head-to-head crisis, from subtle indications of a problem to dealing with awing disaster. From skirmishes to wars. There are many analogies of this process, many reasons why this feature is so attractive to readers, but for the writer, the important thing is how to achieve mastery of this common device.

One answer is, as with many story progression issues, to pre-plot your story. Short stories and flash fiction can often get by without an outline, relying on a good hook , a cunning twist, executed with style, color, and good characterization. Not so novella- or novel-length efforts. No twist will sustain a reader’s interest over the hours invested. No amount of unique characterization will raise the pulse, if it only details a mundane trip to the supermarket.

Whether you outline your story, use scene cards, goal statements, lists of chapter headings, or whatever, it is wise to revisit these notes and decide where along the line increasingly peak events are going to occur, to whom, and the outcomes. Not every clash need be a win for the lead character, or even involve the lead. Often best it not, in fact. But the conflicts should increase in intensity, build towards the climax event of the story, and, if possible, precurse it. With a guide before you, you will better be able to write so as to carry forward not only the storyline, but all those elements that build the suspense, drama, and the foreshadowing intensity that mark a successful and satisfying read.

Characters wandering off “on their own” is an obvious consequence of not doing this. Characters exist as we create them, line by line. Wandering characters are therefore caused by the wandering mind of the author. While this is a creative process itself, it can also throw a wrench into your plot and action ramp. Usually it happens because the author has not prepared enough of a guide to keep his writing on point, and can cause more problems than it solves.

Maintaining one’s writing in a show, not tell, style, remembering colorful description, keeping the actors in character, offering interesting dialog and ideas along the way, detailing the different kinds of action to the right levels, researching and using the knowledge basis upon which the story draws, (period, culture, mechanical, and technical aspects) is in essence, the juggling act a good writer gets proficient doing. These are the tools used simultaneously in writing out prose. You do not need the additional stress of not knowing exactly where each scene is going, what kind of outcome is being written to, or how to get there. Pre-plotting allows the writer to split away these tasks and do them somewhat separately. It may be the one technique that allows stories of any length to be written all.

With your tool before you, it becomes easy to spot lacks that need to be addressed in the story as a construct.

If you find yourself having to narrate yourself out of a corner, “see the reason this happened was…”, pulling rabbits out of hats… “Then, just at the last minute, er, a giant space-gun appeared, blowing the bad monster away…”, have weak or non-existent endings, “and then, eh, the sun went down – the end”, you suffer from lack of plotting enough.

More importantly, if you see these things crop up anyway, you have the road map to amend, and can make the overall changes that vanish them.

None of the above means your writing is going to win out over several thousand other equally proficient authors in the running for publication, but it will keep you a contender, and allow your skills to grow. Also, as with any other tool, the more you employ it, the better you get with it.

F.A.Hyatt