Showing posts with label trope. Show all posts
Showing posts with label trope. Show all posts

Thursday, June 1

True confession. I feel like I ought to like reading romances. I generally prefer a happy ending to a sad one. But each time I've tried one--especially the Kindle First offerings to Prime members--I've been disappointed.

The romance plot model has become so entrenched, it no longer allows room for any genuine surprises. I know there will be some dumb thing that separates heroine and hero at roughly the midpoint and that dumb thing will clear up in a matter of chapters. I know the heroine will be beautiful, as will the hero, though one or both will be clueless about this or insecure in some way. If one of them has a deep, dark secret, the counterpart will have a corresponding one. Even in the hands of a great wordsmith, the formula clunks along as usual, boring me to tears.

I'd love to know if there are established writers out there who have earned a free pass to write plots that don't follow the predictable formula of boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-wins-girl-back-again. I'd like to see some heroines who aren't the usual healthy, educated, white, and beautiful. How about a blind protagonist, or one with a learning disability, or someone biracial or average looking but brainy, or even disfigured (say an amputee veteran)? You find characters like this in literary fiction, women's fiction, romantic comedy, YA and MG. It would be great to see their love stories, and have a departure from the same-old, same-old.


Is there a genre you've tried but just can't connect to? Why do you think that is? 

Is there a romance author doing something unique I might actually enjoy? Do tell. 


Thursday, June 01, 2017 Laurel Garver
True confession. I feel like I ought to like reading romances. I generally prefer a happy ending to a sad one. But each time I've tried one--especially the Kindle First offerings to Prime members--I've been disappointed.

The romance plot model has become so entrenched, it no longer allows room for any genuine surprises. I know there will be some dumb thing that separates heroine and hero at roughly the midpoint and that dumb thing will clear up in a matter of chapters. I know the heroine will be beautiful, as will the hero, though one or both will be clueless about this or insecure in some way. If one of them has a deep, dark secret, the counterpart will have a corresponding one. Even in the hands of a great wordsmith, the formula clunks along as usual, boring me to tears.

I'd love to know if there are established writers out there who have earned a free pass to write plots that don't follow the predictable formula of boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-wins-girl-back-again. I'd like to see some heroines who aren't the usual healthy, educated, white, and beautiful. How about a blind protagonist, or one with a learning disability, or someone biracial or average looking but brainy, or even disfigured (say an amputee veteran)? You find characters like this in literary fiction, women's fiction, romantic comedy, YA and MG. It would be great to see their love stories, and have a departure from the same-old, same-old.


Is there a genre you've tried but just can't connect to? Why do you think that is? 

Is there a romance author doing something unique I might actually enjoy? Do tell. 


Thursday, July 21

"A grieving teen believes her dead father is haunting her" --a tagline for my debut Never Gone, often raises this question: how could this topic possibly be Christian fiction?

Photo by http://morguefile.com/creative/whiterussian
What exactly is a ghost, after all? Do people have a consciousness separate from their bodily existence? If so, can it interact with embodied people? Can it do so when it wishes, or must it be summoned by the living? Is this entire mythos something created to explain demonic presences in our world?

In some circles, this latter view tends to dominate, though the Bible actually shows us an intermediate view: there is a consciousness separate from bodily existence, but it can only interact with embodied people through occult means because it exists in another realm or plane. See the story of Saul contacting Samuel's ghost via the mediation of the Witch of Endor in I Samuel 28. Trying to summon the dead is a bad idea, one that spells the end for Saul's reign.

In Never Gone, my protagonist Danielle has moments where she specifically fears she might have summoned her dead father, knowing that doing such a thing is very dangerous. But longing for a lost loved one does not make one a medium. Reaching across the divide between the living and dead isn't something people can do accidentally.

So what is going on with my ghost of Dani's dad, Graham Rhys Deane?

The idea of parental haunting is pretty old. Shakespeare uses it in Hamlet, for example. I also was inspired by the TV show Providence that aired from 1999-2002, in which a young woman moves home after her mother’s death, and often has long heart-to-heart talks and arguments with her mother’s ghost. The idea of a parental presence lingering to help a child fascinated me, especially when it’s unclear why it’s happening.

Is it possible that not every ghost appearance has a supernatural cause?

Generally, ghost lore in our culture is associated with bad deaths, with unfinished business. The question for me is whose unfinished business? The departed’s or the survivors’?

Dani is a fairly grounded Christian who knows enough “proof texts” (scripture quotes used to prove a particular point) to shut down her own natural emotions in the wake of a devastating loss. Her dad is bound for a happy eternity in heaven, she reasons, so she’s really not supposed to be upset.

This kind of warped stoicism that sometimes arises in my faith tradition concerns me. It’s bad theology to my mind, giving a false view of who God is and how he relates to humanity. In the face of it, a really hurting person can suffer deep internal fracturing. My story’s ghost is in some ways a manifestation of that inner state.

So how does Danielle cope with her ghost problem? I invite you to check out Never Gone to find out!

About Never Gone

Teen artist Dani Deane feels like the universe has imploded when her photographer father is killed. Days after his death, she sees him leafing through sketches in her room, roaming the halls at church, wandering his own wake. Is grief making her crazy? Or is her dad truly adrift between this world and the next, trying to contact her?

Dani longs for his help as she tries and fails to connect with her workaholic mother. Her pain only deepens when astonishing secrets about her family history come to light. But Dani finds a surprising ally in Theo, the quiet guy lingering in the backstage of her life. He persistently reaches out as Dani’s faith falters, her family relationships unravel, and she withdraws into a dangerous obsession with her father’s ghostly appearances. Will she let her broken, prodigal heart find a reason to hope again?

From the skyscrapers of New York to the sheep-dotted English countryside, Never Gone explores life after loss with emotional honesty, humor, and a touch of romance. 



View the trailer HERE

What is your take on the ghost trope?
Thursday, July 21, 2016 Laurel Garver
"A grieving teen believes her dead father is haunting her" --a tagline for my debut Never Gone, often raises this question: how could this topic possibly be Christian fiction?

Photo by http://morguefile.com/creative/whiterussian
What exactly is a ghost, after all? Do people have a consciousness separate from their bodily existence? If so, can it interact with embodied people? Can it do so when it wishes, or must it be summoned by the living? Is this entire mythos something created to explain demonic presences in our world?

In some circles, this latter view tends to dominate, though the Bible actually shows us an intermediate view: there is a consciousness separate from bodily existence, but it can only interact with embodied people through occult means because it exists in another realm or plane. See the story of Saul contacting Samuel's ghost via the mediation of the Witch of Endor in I Samuel 28. Trying to summon the dead is a bad idea, one that spells the end for Saul's reign.

In Never Gone, my protagonist Danielle has moments where she specifically fears she might have summoned her dead father, knowing that doing such a thing is very dangerous. But longing for a lost loved one does not make one a medium. Reaching across the divide between the living and dead isn't something people can do accidentally.

So what is going on with my ghost of Dani's dad, Graham Rhys Deane?

The idea of parental haunting is pretty old. Shakespeare uses it in Hamlet, for example. I also was inspired by the TV show Providence that aired from 1999-2002, in which a young woman moves home after her mother’s death, and often has long heart-to-heart talks and arguments with her mother’s ghost. The idea of a parental presence lingering to help a child fascinated me, especially when it’s unclear why it’s happening.

Is it possible that not every ghost appearance has a supernatural cause?

Generally, ghost lore in our culture is associated with bad deaths, with unfinished business. The question for me is whose unfinished business? The departed’s or the survivors’?

Dani is a fairly grounded Christian who knows enough “proof texts” (scripture quotes used to prove a particular point) to shut down her own natural emotions in the wake of a devastating loss. Her dad is bound for a happy eternity in heaven, she reasons, so she’s really not supposed to be upset.

This kind of warped stoicism that sometimes arises in my faith tradition concerns me. It’s bad theology to my mind, giving a false view of who God is and how he relates to humanity. In the face of it, a really hurting person can suffer deep internal fracturing. My story’s ghost is in some ways a manifestation of that inner state.

So how does Danielle cope with her ghost problem? I invite you to check out Never Gone to find out!

About Never Gone

Teen artist Dani Deane feels like the universe has imploded when her photographer father is killed. Days after his death, she sees him leafing through sketches in her room, roaming the halls at church, wandering his own wake. Is grief making her crazy? Or is her dad truly adrift between this world and the next, trying to contact her?

Dani longs for his help as she tries and fails to connect with her workaholic mother. Her pain only deepens when astonishing secrets about her family history come to light. But Dani finds a surprising ally in Theo, the quiet guy lingering in the backstage of her life. He persistently reaches out as Dani’s faith falters, her family relationships unravel, and she withdraws into a dangerous obsession with her father’s ghostly appearances. Will she let her broken, prodigal heart find a reason to hope again?

From the skyscrapers of New York to the sheep-dotted English countryside, Never Gone explores life after loss with emotional honesty, humor, and a touch of romance. 



View the trailer HERE

What is your take on the ghost trope?

Wednesday, October 21

Photo credit: JulesInKY from morguefile.com
I have a somewhat embarrassing habit when it comes to using Goodreads. I really love to read negative reviews of books that are extremely popular. At first I focused on classics, because their haters are quite hilarious. Then I began branching out to books others raved about that just didn't do it for me. It was gratifying to hear others describe problem after problem.

It's also a bit small minded to be wasting time hunting for another dose of schadenfreude. So I've been looking for ways to reform this vice into something more constructive.

One thing that's pretty clear--you can learn quite a lot about what story elements drive readers batty by listening to their harsher critiques. Some comments will, of course, tell you a lot more about an individual reviewer's biases and hobby horses than about general reader expectations, but others can be quite educational. If you write genre fiction, it can be especially helpful to know what elements readers are sick to death of, or feel cheated if they aren't there.

Here are some writing tips I've gleaned from insightful "mean" readers of popular young adult books:

Characterization no-nos

Protagonist who is


  • Whiny 
  • Self-serving
  • Mean-spirited
  • Indecisive and dithering
  • Thoughtless
  • Foolhardy
  • Bland
  • Flawless
  • Skilled only at being attractive
  • Instantly in love after one smoldering glance
  • Unchanged by the story events

Sidekick who is


  • Only comic relief
  • Hateful
  • Jealous
  • Clone of protagonist
  • An ethnic or racial "type"
  • Deeply stupid
  • Foolhardy
  • Disloyal

Love interest who is


  • Instantly in love after one smoldering glance
  • Narcissistic
  • Abusive
  • Stalker-ish
  • Controlling
  • Prone to jealous rages
  • Boring
  • Too dependent
  • Lacking personal goals
  • Lacking outside interests
  • Flawless
  • Constantly pursued by rivals

Other hated character tropes


  • Cheerleader mean girls
  • Athlete bullies
  • Self-absorbed, uninvolved or dead parents
  • Love triangles with bland, flat love interests
  • Romance based only on physical attraction


Plot no-nos


  • Pacing that drags
  • Pacing that races
  • Abruptly dropped subplots
  • Actions aren't motivated
  • Actions aren't realistic
  • Episodic plots
  • Repetitious actions
  • Melodramatic responses


World building no-nos


  • Bland small towns with no character
  • Cookie-cutter suburban settings with no diversity
  • Unrealistic, movie-set settings
  • No clear origins for a society
  • No sense of how society is organized
  • Unclear social strata 
  • Unclear economic system
  • Unclear food sources
  • No one seems to do essential jobs
  • Unexplained divisions among groups
  • Lack of age diversity

Look at another genre, you'd likely gather a different list. But there's no doubt that you can learn a lot about reader expectation by taking a gander at some less than glowing reviews. Just resist the urge to gloat. Instead, use the information to grow.

 What writerly foibles drive you batty? Have you even gleaned writing lessons from online reviews?
Wednesday, October 21, 2015 Laurel Garver
Photo credit: JulesInKY from morguefile.com
I have a somewhat embarrassing habit when it comes to using Goodreads. I really love to read negative reviews of books that are extremely popular. At first I focused on classics, because their haters are quite hilarious. Then I began branching out to books others raved about that just didn't do it for me. It was gratifying to hear others describe problem after problem.

It's also a bit small minded to be wasting time hunting for another dose of schadenfreude. So I've been looking for ways to reform this vice into something more constructive.

One thing that's pretty clear--you can learn quite a lot about what story elements drive readers batty by listening to their harsher critiques. Some comments will, of course, tell you a lot more about an individual reviewer's biases and hobby horses than about general reader expectations, but others can be quite educational. If you write genre fiction, it can be especially helpful to know what elements readers are sick to death of, or feel cheated if they aren't there.

Here are some writing tips I've gleaned from insightful "mean" readers of popular young adult books:

Characterization no-nos

Protagonist who is


  • Whiny 
  • Self-serving
  • Mean-spirited
  • Indecisive and dithering
  • Thoughtless
  • Foolhardy
  • Bland
  • Flawless
  • Skilled only at being attractive
  • Instantly in love after one smoldering glance
  • Unchanged by the story events

Sidekick who is


  • Only comic relief
  • Hateful
  • Jealous
  • Clone of protagonist
  • An ethnic or racial "type"
  • Deeply stupid
  • Foolhardy
  • Disloyal

Love interest who is


  • Instantly in love after one smoldering glance
  • Narcissistic
  • Abusive
  • Stalker-ish
  • Controlling
  • Prone to jealous rages
  • Boring
  • Too dependent
  • Lacking personal goals
  • Lacking outside interests
  • Flawless
  • Constantly pursued by rivals

Other hated character tropes


  • Cheerleader mean girls
  • Athlete bullies
  • Self-absorbed, uninvolved or dead parents
  • Love triangles with bland, flat love interests
  • Romance based only on physical attraction


Plot no-nos


  • Pacing that drags
  • Pacing that races
  • Abruptly dropped subplots
  • Actions aren't motivated
  • Actions aren't realistic
  • Episodic plots
  • Repetitious actions
  • Melodramatic responses


World building no-nos


  • Bland small towns with no character
  • Cookie-cutter suburban settings with no diversity
  • Unrealistic, movie-set settings
  • No clear origins for a society
  • No sense of how society is organized
  • Unclear social strata 
  • Unclear economic system
  • Unclear food sources
  • No one seems to do essential jobs
  • Unexplained divisions among groups
  • Lack of age diversity

Look at another genre, you'd likely gather a different list. But there's no doubt that you can learn a lot about reader expectation by taking a gander at some less than glowing reviews. Just resist the urge to gloat. Instead, use the information to grow.

 What writerly foibles drive you batty? Have you even gleaned writing lessons from online reviews?

Wednesday, September 9

Photo credit: Prawny from morguefile.com 
Last year, a handful of authors began an initiative called "We Need Diverse Books" to raise awareness about  the lack diversity in traditionally published children's books. Librarians and educators have joined them. In their mission statement, they clarify what they mean by diverse:

We recognize all diverse experiences, including (but not limited to) LGBTQIA, people of color, gender diversity, people with disabilities*, and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities.
*We subscribe to a broad definition of disability, which includes but is not limited to physical, sensory, cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities, chronic conditions, and mental illnesses (this may also include addiction). Furthermore, we subscribe to a social model of disability, which presents disability as created by barriers in the social environment, due to lack of equal access, stereotyping, and other forms of marginalization. 
(Source: http://weneeddiversebooks.org/mission-statement/)

Whether or not you agree with their assertion that the types of people listed above are underrepresented, and whether or not you like their language for describing the issue, the group certainly has statistics on their side, at least when it comes to kidlit. And you don't have to look far in our world to see the problems created when various groups misunderstand and mistrust one another. Literature can be a bridge for building cross-cultural understanding and empathy.

Perhaps you don't write kidlit. But do you write nothing but characters who resemble you in most ways? If so, it might be time to rethink that.

It's true that some communities are fairly ethnically homogeneous. But even they will naturally contain some of the  groups mentioned above. (I'd note WNDB doesn't discuss the ageist bias against elderly characters).

So how does one go about building fictional worlds that aren't Mayberry or Stepford?

Here are a few ideas to get you started:

Learn what the stereotypes are

It can be easy to think we're successfully diversifying our casts by including a brainy Asian best friend or a wise wheelchair-bound mentor. But both of these characterizations are based on standing stereotypes about these groups--that Asians are naturally top scholars and that disability brings magical powers of wisdom or observation. Stereotypes can be hard to identify in our own thinking because they are ingrained expectations and ways of interpreting situations that are constantly reinforced by majority culture. They are the "beam in your own eye" that prevent you from seeing correctly (to quote from Matt 7:3).

A good place to start educating yourself is the TV Tropes "Magical Minority Person" page, which describes numerous stereotyped depictions of diverse characters often shunted into supporting roles.

Read diverse books

You very well may have to go outside your genre to find work by authors of other ethnicities, or at least to bookshops outside your neighborhood.

Listen to the cadence of books translated from other languages. Look for diverse thematic concerns. What values are rewarded and vices punished in communities unlike your own?

Expand your study

Do you find yourself drawn to particular cultures and subcultures? Read all you can about them, and seek out all their modes of creative expression. Learn all you can about historical shaping forces and how those play into a culture's self-concept and dreams for tomorrow.

Think about how what you learned could press against or defy certain stereotypes about that group. Consider what traits might marginalize a person even in that minority, and what traits would mark him/her a "winner" or leader.

Listen and ask

If you're able to get to know individuals that belong to the minority group you'd like to depict, be genuine and vulnerable. Don't treat them like lab specimens. Ask them questions you would any friend you'd want to know more deeply and be equally willing to share your own stories.

Where did you grow up? What was that like?
What did you love and hate most about your childhood?
What do you like to do for fun as a kid?
What careers did you aspire to?
Who were your heroes?
How did you fit in or stand out in your family, school, neighborhood?
What "borders" have you had to cross in your life? What has that been like?
What bugs you about mainstream media portrayals of your neighborhood?
What do you wish outsiders knew about your community?

If you develop a character based on your friend's stories, let the friend beta read before you finalize your manuscript, to ensure your depiction isn't off base.

Encamp

It's difficult to do another culture justice until you've inhabited it yourself. There's only so much that reading books, watching movies, listening to music, and even interviewing can provide. If you find you want to take the big leap and write a protagonist from a group to which you don't belong (versus a supporting character), it may be necessary to live for a time among that group. Actually walking through a neighborhood, learning its smells and flavors, feeling your heart thump at its dangers or soar at its delights--those experiences will give you the most realistic details to use in your work. Otherwise, you're likely to resort to stereotype and trope.

The people you meet and observe day after day will provide the best characterization details, the most accurate lingo for dialogue, and the most compelling backstories. Just be sure to create composites of several real people, or disguise them by changing key details (age, gender, appearance).

Have you written characters outside the cultural groups to which you belong? What tips would you add?
Wednesday, September 09, 2015 Laurel Garver
Photo credit: Prawny from morguefile.com 
Last year, a handful of authors began an initiative called "We Need Diverse Books" to raise awareness about  the lack diversity in traditionally published children's books. Librarians and educators have joined them. In their mission statement, they clarify what they mean by diverse:

We recognize all diverse experiences, including (but not limited to) LGBTQIA, people of color, gender diversity, people with disabilities*, and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities.
*We subscribe to a broad definition of disability, which includes but is not limited to physical, sensory, cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities, chronic conditions, and mental illnesses (this may also include addiction). Furthermore, we subscribe to a social model of disability, which presents disability as created by barriers in the social environment, due to lack of equal access, stereotyping, and other forms of marginalization. 
(Source: http://weneeddiversebooks.org/mission-statement/)

Whether or not you agree with their assertion that the types of people listed above are underrepresented, and whether or not you like their language for describing the issue, the group certainly has statistics on their side, at least when it comes to kidlit. And you don't have to look far in our world to see the problems created when various groups misunderstand and mistrust one another. Literature can be a bridge for building cross-cultural understanding and empathy.

Perhaps you don't write kidlit. But do you write nothing but characters who resemble you in most ways? If so, it might be time to rethink that.

It's true that some communities are fairly ethnically homogeneous. But even they will naturally contain some of the  groups mentioned above. (I'd note WNDB doesn't discuss the ageist bias against elderly characters).

So how does one go about building fictional worlds that aren't Mayberry or Stepford?

Here are a few ideas to get you started:

Learn what the stereotypes are

It can be easy to think we're successfully diversifying our casts by including a brainy Asian best friend or a wise wheelchair-bound mentor. But both of these characterizations are based on standing stereotypes about these groups--that Asians are naturally top scholars and that disability brings magical powers of wisdom or observation. Stereotypes can be hard to identify in our own thinking because they are ingrained expectations and ways of interpreting situations that are constantly reinforced by majority culture. They are the "beam in your own eye" that prevent you from seeing correctly (to quote from Matt 7:3).

A good place to start educating yourself is the TV Tropes "Magical Minority Person" page, which describes numerous stereotyped depictions of diverse characters often shunted into supporting roles.

Read diverse books

You very well may have to go outside your genre to find work by authors of other ethnicities, or at least to bookshops outside your neighborhood.

Listen to the cadence of books translated from other languages. Look for diverse thematic concerns. What values are rewarded and vices punished in communities unlike your own?

Expand your study

Do you find yourself drawn to particular cultures and subcultures? Read all you can about them, and seek out all their modes of creative expression. Learn all you can about historical shaping forces and how those play into a culture's self-concept and dreams for tomorrow.

Think about how what you learned could press against or defy certain stereotypes about that group. Consider what traits might marginalize a person even in that minority, and what traits would mark him/her a "winner" or leader.

Listen and ask

If you're able to get to know individuals that belong to the minority group you'd like to depict, be genuine and vulnerable. Don't treat them like lab specimens. Ask them questions you would any friend you'd want to know more deeply and be equally willing to share your own stories.

Where did you grow up? What was that like?
What did you love and hate most about your childhood?
What do you like to do for fun as a kid?
What careers did you aspire to?
Who were your heroes?
How did you fit in or stand out in your family, school, neighborhood?
What "borders" have you had to cross in your life? What has that been like?
What bugs you about mainstream media portrayals of your neighborhood?
What do you wish outsiders knew about your community?

If you develop a character based on your friend's stories, let the friend beta read before you finalize your manuscript, to ensure your depiction isn't off base.

Encamp

It's difficult to do another culture justice until you've inhabited it yourself. There's only so much that reading books, watching movies, listening to music, and even interviewing can provide. If you find you want to take the big leap and write a protagonist from a group to which you don't belong (versus a supporting character), it may be necessary to live for a time among that group. Actually walking through a neighborhood, learning its smells and flavors, feeling your heart thump at its dangers or soar at its delights--those experiences will give you the most realistic details to use in your work. Otherwise, you're likely to resort to stereotype and trope.

The people you meet and observe day after day will provide the best characterization details, the most accurate lingo for dialogue, and the most compelling backstories. Just be sure to create composites of several real people, or disguise them by changing key details (age, gender, appearance).

Have you written characters outside the cultural groups to which you belong? What tips would you add?

Friday, January 24


In my previous posts in this mini-series, I discussed why insta-love is an ineffective way to build a romance plot, and suggested some alternate first-meet reactions other than immediate true love.

Today I'd like to append that list with three more creative first-meets to add to your romance toolbox.

Insta-awww

image: www.prevention.com

In the novel Eleanor and Park, Rainbow Rowell sets the scene of schoolbus heirarchy, and the hero Park's tenuous position within it. She then introduces Eleanor as someone whose total lack of fashion sense will make her an easy target for bullies. Park studies her, describing her not in a cruel way, but with a kind of softly analytic approach. He sees vulnerability and worries for her: "She reminded Park of a scarecrow or one of the trouble dolls his mom kept on her dresser. Like something that wouldn't survive in the wild" (Eleanor and Park 8).

You might say his first impression is concern, compassion, or even pity. Feelings that make you say "Awww."

This kind of first-meet is often instrumental in friendships. Think of how Buffy first meets Willow in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Queen Bee Cordelia has taken Buffy under her wing, and walks her through the school, pausing to bully Willow at a drinking fountain. Buffy stands by, helpless, as Cordelia spews a snotty put-down at the brainy nerd girl. But as a vulnerable outsider herself, Buffy connects with Willow in that moment and later seeks her out for friendship.

Insta-aww was a fairly common  first meet emotion for the nurse romance genre, in which the spunky caregiver would fall for a brave patient. Today you're most likely to find it in Christian fiction, especially historical settings where the heroine is struggling through some kind of hardship. The hero will see her plight, worry for her, and want to help.

Fish-in-a-bucket


Pull two "fish" out of their natural habitat and toss them into the same "bucket" and they are likely to bond with one another. The shared sense of being outsiders, and shared experience of trying to survive hardship will create connection. Think of the romances that develop on reality TV competitions like Survivor. Think of Anne Frank, hiding from the Nazis and pining for the boy she left on the outside, stuck for years in a tiny, hidden apartment with Peter Van Daan. It's no surprise the two develop a romantic attachment.

You, too?


Sometimes the "out of water" isn't quite so extreme as fish-in-a-bucket scenarios. Two characters might both be new arrivals at a venue that offers a benefit, such as drama club or Narc Anon or the honors dorm. The location will indicate that they have some similarity, such as thespian leanings, a desire to overcome addiction, or top marks, in the cases of my previous examples. Knowing that the other has at least one shared value removes a barrier and can open the way for other kinds of attraction.

What are some of your favorite books, films or shows that portray insta-aww, fish-in-a-bucket or "you, too?" first meets?
Friday, January 24, 2014 Laurel Garver

In my previous posts in this mini-series, I discussed why insta-love is an ineffective way to build a romance plot, and suggested some alternate first-meet reactions other than immediate true love.

Today I'd like to append that list with three more creative first-meets to add to your romance toolbox.

Insta-awww

image: www.prevention.com

In the novel Eleanor and Park, Rainbow Rowell sets the scene of schoolbus heirarchy, and the hero Park's tenuous position within it. She then introduces Eleanor as someone whose total lack of fashion sense will make her an easy target for bullies. Park studies her, describing her not in a cruel way, but with a kind of softly analytic approach. He sees vulnerability and worries for her: "She reminded Park of a scarecrow or one of the trouble dolls his mom kept on her dresser. Like something that wouldn't survive in the wild" (Eleanor and Park 8).

You might say his first impression is concern, compassion, or even pity. Feelings that make you say "Awww."

This kind of first-meet is often instrumental in friendships. Think of how Buffy first meets Willow in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Queen Bee Cordelia has taken Buffy under her wing, and walks her through the school, pausing to bully Willow at a drinking fountain. Buffy stands by, helpless, as Cordelia spews a snotty put-down at the brainy nerd girl. But as a vulnerable outsider herself, Buffy connects with Willow in that moment and later seeks her out for friendship.

Insta-aww was a fairly common  first meet emotion for the nurse romance genre, in which the spunky caregiver would fall for a brave patient. Today you're most likely to find it in Christian fiction, especially historical settings where the heroine is struggling through some kind of hardship. The hero will see her plight, worry for her, and want to help.

Fish-in-a-bucket


Pull two "fish" out of their natural habitat and toss them into the same "bucket" and they are likely to bond with one another. The shared sense of being outsiders, and shared experience of trying to survive hardship will create connection. Think of the romances that develop on reality TV competitions like Survivor. Think of Anne Frank, hiding from the Nazis and pining for the boy she left on the outside, stuck for years in a tiny, hidden apartment with Peter Van Daan. It's no surprise the two develop a romantic attachment.

You, too?


Sometimes the "out of water" isn't quite so extreme as fish-in-a-bucket scenarios. Two characters might both be new arrivals at a venue that offers a benefit, such as drama club or Narc Anon or the honors dorm. The location will indicate that they have some similarity, such as thespian leanings, a desire to overcome addiction, or top marks, in the cases of my previous examples. Knowing that the other has at least one shared value removes a barrier and can open the way for other kinds of attraction.

What are some of your favorite books, films or shows that portray insta-aww, fish-in-a-bucket or "you, too?" first meets?

Tuesday, January 21

Photo credit: jpkwitter from morguefile.com
First impressions can be powerful, but having a character go from never-seen-you-before stranger to die-for-you, head-over-heels, true love in under sixty seconds isn't terribly realistic. Nor is it the most effective way to build a romantic plot line. There's too little room for escalation, for change and growth.

One instance where Insta-love can be effectively used is when the character's fatal flaw is being naively trusting and having no filters. Think of Anna in Frozen, who's ready to hand over her heart--and her family's kingdom--to the first guy who turns on the charm. This type of character flaw is common for an education plot, in which the character must, through trial and error, become more wise.

With that caveat out of the way, let's look at some other approaches to that all-important first meeting, and types of first impressions beyond insta-love.


Intrigue


When the characters first meet, the protagonist might find the potential love interest unusual in some way. Immediately questions arise about this person. Perhaps his reputation precedes him, and the heroine suspects the whispers and rumblings might not be true. Or there are small details he notices about this woman that indicate she'd be fun to get to know better. Beginning at piqued curiosity can lead all sorts of interesting directions.

Admiration


Characters meet in such a way that an admirable trait is revealed, whether big heroics like a fire-fighter rescue, or more ordinary positive interaction, such as a store clerk who's especially kind and helpful. Being drawn from a distance to someone who is exceptionally talented (a musician or athlete for instance), intelligent, or generous might also stir up initial feelings of attraction.

Annoyance


Characters meet in such a way that one causes the other an inconvenience or hardship. The first feelings might be simply annoyance. How the harm is dealt with can make for continued interactions for the better--or for the worse. Either way, an accidentally bad first impression is a tension-building obstacle to overcome.

Enmity


Characters from opposing sides, when thrown together, are more likely to feel insta-ugh than insta-love. This representative of the enemy team, social class, political party, competitor business, family, what have you, will be perceived negatively at first, even if he or she displays admirable traits or is physically attractive. Undoing the protagonist's prejudice will require a multi-pronged approach.

Dismissal


When the characters meet, one might not particularly register the other's presence. He might be distracted by other difficulties and challenges; she might be paying more attention to an already-known person in the scene. This kind of non-impression gives you excellent space to escalate. Clearly a big obstacle to overcome is the character's inability to get out of his own head and engage with others.

Secondary characters will play a large role in helping along a connection. The buddy might have to point out her good qualities, the BFF might find him drool-worthy in a way your heroine was too distracted to notice.

Physical attraction


This person is just so H-O-T. It's like a magnetic pull....

Yawn. Far too many book romances begin with only physical attraction, especially to another's appearance. Besides being cliche, it also makes your protagonist seem extremely shallow.  It's far more interesting to have a character register attraction after having other impressions--she's smart and kind AND pretty. He's self-effacing and well-read AND has great hair. Mixing in other senses, like sound and smell, can make the experience of attraction more interesting to read. He has a honey-smooth voice; she smells fresh-scrubbed and sunshiny.

Of course, when setting up a love triangle, many writers choose to have the heroine make one connection that's only skin-deep, and another that's multi-faceted, with more growth potential. Just keep in mind that this kind of unsubtle approach may strike readers as predictable. Triangles are most effective when a protagonist has to choose between two good options.

What are your favorite first-meets in books or film that took an approach other than insta-love?
Tuesday, January 21, 2014 Laurel Garver
Photo credit: jpkwitter from morguefile.com
First impressions can be powerful, but having a character go from never-seen-you-before stranger to die-for-you, head-over-heels, true love in under sixty seconds isn't terribly realistic. Nor is it the most effective way to build a romantic plot line. There's too little room for escalation, for change and growth.

One instance where Insta-love can be effectively used is when the character's fatal flaw is being naively trusting and having no filters. Think of Anna in Frozen, who's ready to hand over her heart--and her family's kingdom--to the first guy who turns on the charm. This type of character flaw is common for an education plot, in which the character must, through trial and error, become more wise.

With that caveat out of the way, let's look at some other approaches to that all-important first meeting, and types of first impressions beyond insta-love.


Intrigue


When the characters first meet, the protagonist might find the potential love interest unusual in some way. Immediately questions arise about this person. Perhaps his reputation precedes him, and the heroine suspects the whispers and rumblings might not be true. Or there are small details he notices about this woman that indicate she'd be fun to get to know better. Beginning at piqued curiosity can lead all sorts of interesting directions.

Admiration


Characters meet in such a way that an admirable trait is revealed, whether big heroics like a fire-fighter rescue, or more ordinary positive interaction, such as a store clerk who's especially kind and helpful. Being drawn from a distance to someone who is exceptionally talented (a musician or athlete for instance), intelligent, or generous might also stir up initial feelings of attraction.

Annoyance


Characters meet in such a way that one causes the other an inconvenience or hardship. The first feelings might be simply annoyance. How the harm is dealt with can make for continued interactions for the better--or for the worse. Either way, an accidentally bad first impression is a tension-building obstacle to overcome.

Enmity


Characters from opposing sides, when thrown together, are more likely to feel insta-ugh than insta-love. This representative of the enemy team, social class, political party, competitor business, family, what have you, will be perceived negatively at first, even if he or she displays admirable traits or is physically attractive. Undoing the protagonist's prejudice will require a multi-pronged approach.

Dismissal


When the characters meet, one might not particularly register the other's presence. He might be distracted by other difficulties and challenges; she might be paying more attention to an already-known person in the scene. This kind of non-impression gives you excellent space to escalate. Clearly a big obstacle to overcome is the character's inability to get out of his own head and engage with others.

Secondary characters will play a large role in helping along a connection. The buddy might have to point out her good qualities, the BFF might find him drool-worthy in a way your heroine was too distracted to notice.

Physical attraction


This person is just so H-O-T. It's like a magnetic pull....

Yawn. Far too many book romances begin with only physical attraction, especially to another's appearance. Besides being cliche, it also makes your protagonist seem extremely shallow.  It's far more interesting to have a character register attraction after having other impressions--she's smart and kind AND pretty. He's self-effacing and well-read AND has great hair. Mixing in other senses, like sound and smell, can make the experience of attraction more interesting to read. He has a honey-smooth voice; she smells fresh-scrubbed and sunshiny.

Of course, when setting up a love triangle, many writers choose to have the heroine make one connection that's only skin-deep, and another that's multi-faceted, with more growth potential. Just keep in mind that this kind of unsubtle approach may strike readers as predictable. Triangles are most effective when a protagonist has to choose between two good options.

What are your favorite first-meets in books or film that took an approach other than insta-love?

Tuesday, January 14

During my blogging hiatus, I went on a big reading binge, gobbling up six books in under three weeks. I largely was catching up on recommendations and newer books by favorite authors including: Catching Fire (Suzanne Collins), Where She Went (Gayle Forman), Code Name Verity (Elizabeth Wein), The Story of Us (Deb Caletti), Eleanor and Park (Rainbow Rowell), and The Future of Us (Jay Asher and Carolyn Mackler).

image by paulabflat, morguefile.com
These books had some love triangles, some shaken long-term relationships and some beginning tingles, but happily no insta-love. You know what I mean by that term, don't you? It's an overwhelming die-for-you passion ignited by a single glance. I'll spare you a rant on why it makes me crazy. Suffice it to say it's not only an emotionally unhealthy way to approach romantic attachment, but also poor storytelling. 

Giving characters instant whammo-connection cuts in half the size of your emotional arc. There's little room for the characters to change and grow over the course of the story. Just like with conflict, romance needs space to escalate as the story progresses. (For more on this idea of escalation, see my post Emotional Arcs: the teaspoon problem.) Without escalation, the romance plot will be largely static. You'll be tempted to throw a lot of melodrama at the couple just to keep yourself from becoming entirely bored with them.  

There are a number of techniques one can use to widen that arc. In the coming weeks I'll share some of the best tips for slow-build romance I picked up from analyzing works that did it well.

What are your thoughts on insta-love? What are some of your favorite stories with dynamic romances?
Tuesday, January 14, 2014 Laurel Garver
During my blogging hiatus, I went on a big reading binge, gobbling up six books in under three weeks. I largely was catching up on recommendations and newer books by favorite authors including: Catching Fire (Suzanne Collins), Where She Went (Gayle Forman), Code Name Verity (Elizabeth Wein), The Story of Us (Deb Caletti), Eleanor and Park (Rainbow Rowell), and The Future of Us (Jay Asher and Carolyn Mackler).

image by paulabflat, morguefile.com
These books had some love triangles, some shaken long-term relationships and some beginning tingles, but happily no insta-love. You know what I mean by that term, don't you? It's an overwhelming die-for-you passion ignited by a single glance. I'll spare you a rant on why it makes me crazy. Suffice it to say it's not only an emotionally unhealthy way to approach romantic attachment, but also poor storytelling. 

Giving characters instant whammo-connection cuts in half the size of your emotional arc. There's little room for the characters to change and grow over the course of the story. Just like with conflict, romance needs space to escalate as the story progresses. (For more on this idea of escalation, see my post Emotional Arcs: the teaspoon problem.) Without escalation, the romance plot will be largely static. You'll be tempted to throw a lot of melodrama at the couple just to keep yourself from becoming entirely bored with them.  

There are a number of techniques one can use to widen that arc. In the coming weeks I'll share some of the best tips for slow-build romance I picked up from analyzing works that did it well.

What are your thoughts on insta-love? What are some of your favorite stories with dynamic romances?

Thursday, August 2

I write contemporary YA and have been reading heavily in the genre for years--the humorous, the romance-driven, the heavy-hitting "issue" books, the lyrical coming of age. There's a lot of diversity. There's also (may I say it?) a lot of sameness. As Blake Snyder notes about "salable work" in Save the Cat, "give us more of the same, only different."

A few of things I noticed aren't being published in contemporary mainstream YA--cross-generational relationships, grieving someone other than a peer, characters struggling to mature in a faith tradition and make it their own (rather than rebel against it).

I looked at Christian-market YA and didn't see anyone coming from mainline or reformed Protestantism. Apparently all fictional Christians are low church evangelicals or Amish, despite the fact that among the billions of Christians worldwide, they're a minority (in the case of the Amish, a tiny one; see the numbers here). The characters are almost never urban, except for the African-Americans. They don't interact with Christians from other countries except in missions contexts.

I realized my novel didn't fit many of the cliches/tropes publishers seem to want. I have an Anglican teen from NYC who has lost a parent. Her relationships with extended family are are as important to her healing as her relationships with her peers. She's not another secular/non-denom suburbanite who loses a best friend/sibling and heals by hooking up with dream boy. (Sorry if that sounds snarky--I've seen this formula quite a bit.)

I realized I could abandon the story, spin it in ways more palatable for one market or the other. Or I could go it alone.

When you write outside the box, there's risk. But there's also opportunity. Because outside-the-box stories have the potential to build a readership among those tired of or bored with current cliches/tropes. The trend-setting books are often ones no one saw coming.

And when traditional publishing isn't willing to take the risk, you now have other options.

Have you assessed the market fit of your work? Do you like to read outside-the-box stories that push against reigning tropes in a genre?
Thursday, August 02, 2012 Laurel Garver
I write contemporary YA and have been reading heavily in the genre for years--the humorous, the romance-driven, the heavy-hitting "issue" books, the lyrical coming of age. There's a lot of diversity. There's also (may I say it?) a lot of sameness. As Blake Snyder notes about "salable work" in Save the Cat, "give us more of the same, only different."

A few of things I noticed aren't being published in contemporary mainstream YA--cross-generational relationships, grieving someone other than a peer, characters struggling to mature in a faith tradition and make it their own (rather than rebel against it).

I looked at Christian-market YA and didn't see anyone coming from mainline or reformed Protestantism. Apparently all fictional Christians are low church evangelicals or Amish, despite the fact that among the billions of Christians worldwide, they're a minority (in the case of the Amish, a tiny one; see the numbers here). The characters are almost never urban, except for the African-Americans. They don't interact with Christians from other countries except in missions contexts.

I realized my novel didn't fit many of the cliches/tropes publishers seem to want. I have an Anglican teen from NYC who has lost a parent. Her relationships with extended family are are as important to her healing as her relationships with her peers. She's not another secular/non-denom suburbanite who loses a best friend/sibling and heals by hooking up with dream boy. (Sorry if that sounds snarky--I've seen this formula quite a bit.)

I realized I could abandon the story, spin it in ways more palatable for one market or the other. Or I could go it alone.

When you write outside the box, there's risk. But there's also opportunity. Because outside-the-box stories have the potential to build a readership among those tired of or bored with current cliches/tropes. The trend-setting books are often ones no one saw coming.

And when traditional publishing isn't willing to take the risk, you now have other options.

Have you assessed the market fit of your work? Do you like to read outside-the-box stories that push against reigning tropes in a genre?

Tuesday, December 28

Welcome back to the final week of my countdown of top blog posts of 2010. This one appeared in January and generated some great discussion. I'd love for my new readers to chime in.

= = = = =

What’s the deal with adults in books for teens? Seriously? Is there some rule I don’t know about that says the grownups need to disappear or your teen readers will? If there is, I’d like to know how it came about, when and why.

The more YA I read with absent, distracted or downright neglectful parents, the more this bothers me. It’s not realistic, especially for the Gen-Y millennials. If anything, these kids are overparented. The term “helicopter parent” came into vogue while today’s college students and their younger teen sibs were growing up. Why isn’t fiction reflecting this reality?

I wonder how much the absent parents thing is us Gen-X and Boomer writers assuming that adolescence hasn’t changed that much from when we were kids. Because it has in some pretty surprising ways. We were expected to learn to adapt to adult ways of doing things. The parents and their marriage were the center of the family. That’s not the case with the parents of today’s teens. Whether it’s because of the skyrocketing divorce rate, or the culture of achievement or the increasing influence of “child-rearing experts,” parents’ lives revolved around their kids, especially in the 1990s. (The trend is swinging away from this, I think, based on the advice I hear child-rearing experts spouting now: nix the family bed, put a lock on your bedroom door, have a regular date night, vacation sans kids.)

The teens I know have tighter relationships with their parents than I had with mine. They respect and even like the adults in their world who treat them fairly and care about them. It bothers them deeply when adults aren’t fair or don’t care. They don’t just shrug it off as normal.

On the college campus where I work, I often see an extreme result of overparenting: enmeshment and immaturity. These 18-23 year olds call mom the moment they leave class. They can’t make decisions or do scary adult things like job hunt without a lot of hand-holding. They expect to be rescued when they screw up. Cell phones have added to this culture of learned helplessness.

Are we removing authority figures from our stories thinking this will open the way for the most high-stakes, zowie-wow plots kids will love? But is this merely laziness? Have we assumed that the only way to show kids learning to grasp their own competence is to remove all other sources of competence from the picture?

What does adult-less fiction do for overparented millennials? I’m not sure if they think it sounds cool or find it deeply terrifying. I suspect the latter. The process of individuation is going to look different for them than it did for a Gen-Xer like me. What they could probably use is more fictional pictures of cross-generational relationships that are balanced—not one extreme (the orphanhood and neglect they see in books) or the other (smothering enmeshment they experience in life).

J.K. Rowling is one of the few YA authors I’ve read recently who incorporates adults well in her stories. I think the balance of cross-generational relationships is an aspect that resonated with Gen-Y and made the Harry Potter series such a phenomenal bestseller. Sure, Harry is an orphan, but he craves parenting. Ron is a bit of a doofus, but his parents love him so fiercely, he never falls into despair about it. Harry’s maturation process is one of learning to trust the caring adults around him, to lean into their strength, to use their wisdom and make it his own, to follow their example and to innovate, building on their knowledge. Rowling is never preachy about it, but it’s clear that she understands kids have to be equipped to face real, adult challenges. This equipping process is a prime task of adolescence.

Tell me what you think of portrayals of adults in YA. Who do you think does it well, or not, and why? What’s your take on the “adult-less world 'rule'”?
Tuesday, December 28, 2010 Laurel Garver
Welcome back to the final week of my countdown of top blog posts of 2010. This one appeared in January and generated some great discussion. I'd love for my new readers to chime in.

= = = = =

What’s the deal with adults in books for teens? Seriously? Is there some rule I don’t know about that says the grownups need to disappear or your teen readers will? If there is, I’d like to know how it came about, when and why.

The more YA I read with absent, distracted or downright neglectful parents, the more this bothers me. It’s not realistic, especially for the Gen-Y millennials. If anything, these kids are overparented. The term “helicopter parent” came into vogue while today’s college students and their younger teen sibs were growing up. Why isn’t fiction reflecting this reality?

I wonder how much the absent parents thing is us Gen-X and Boomer writers assuming that adolescence hasn’t changed that much from when we were kids. Because it has in some pretty surprising ways. We were expected to learn to adapt to adult ways of doing things. The parents and their marriage were the center of the family. That’s not the case with the parents of today’s teens. Whether it’s because of the skyrocketing divorce rate, or the culture of achievement or the increasing influence of “child-rearing experts,” parents’ lives revolved around their kids, especially in the 1990s. (The trend is swinging away from this, I think, based on the advice I hear child-rearing experts spouting now: nix the family bed, put a lock on your bedroom door, have a regular date night, vacation sans kids.)

The teens I know have tighter relationships with their parents than I had with mine. They respect and even like the adults in their world who treat them fairly and care about them. It bothers them deeply when adults aren’t fair or don’t care. They don’t just shrug it off as normal.

On the college campus where I work, I often see an extreme result of overparenting: enmeshment and immaturity. These 18-23 year olds call mom the moment they leave class. They can’t make decisions or do scary adult things like job hunt without a lot of hand-holding. They expect to be rescued when they screw up. Cell phones have added to this culture of learned helplessness.

Are we removing authority figures from our stories thinking this will open the way for the most high-stakes, zowie-wow plots kids will love? But is this merely laziness? Have we assumed that the only way to show kids learning to grasp their own competence is to remove all other sources of competence from the picture?

What does adult-less fiction do for overparented millennials? I’m not sure if they think it sounds cool or find it deeply terrifying. I suspect the latter. The process of individuation is going to look different for them than it did for a Gen-Xer like me. What they could probably use is more fictional pictures of cross-generational relationships that are balanced—not one extreme (the orphanhood and neglect they see in books) or the other (smothering enmeshment they experience in life).

J.K. Rowling is one of the few YA authors I’ve read recently who incorporates adults well in her stories. I think the balance of cross-generational relationships is an aspect that resonated with Gen-Y and made the Harry Potter series such a phenomenal bestseller. Sure, Harry is an orphan, but he craves parenting. Ron is a bit of a doofus, but his parents love him so fiercely, he never falls into despair about it. Harry’s maturation process is one of learning to trust the caring adults around him, to lean into their strength, to use their wisdom and make it his own, to follow their example and to innovate, building on their knowledge. Rowling is never preachy about it, but it’s clear that she understands kids have to be equipped to face real, adult challenges. This equipping process is a prime task of adolescence.

Tell me what you think of portrayals of adults in YA. Who do you think does it well, or not, and why? What’s your take on the “adult-less world 'rule'”?

Thursday, December 16

My Tuesday post, "No Mary Sues: operating at maximum capacity," was intended to get you all thinking about ways to keep your characters perpetually striving towards goals, or at least pondering them, worrying them, feeling strongly about them--rather than letting characters give up and walk away too quickly when conflicts arise.

I'd used the term "Mary Sue" in my title, believing this to be the proper term for the coddled character. I linked THIS "Mary Sue litmus test" which seemed to take the term in a somewhat different direction. The testmakers identified Mary Sue as a "wish fulfillment character" who is not only coddled, but also too precious by half--too much fantasy, not enough reality.

Turns out this link was only very peripherally connected to my point, but it did generate some intriguing concerns and questions in your comments.

Susan Kaye Quinn @ Ink Spells said:

"I think you have to be a little careful with the Mary Sue generalization (like any sweeping definition, especially one with so many requirements). It is undeniably true that Mary Sue characters exist, just like any stereotype. But just because your character may have a "Mary Sue" type characteristic doesn't make them an egregious thing that must be banished from the face of the earth (I think the authors of the test even say this).

Ex:
Question 1.e. Does your character's name ...
Involve a noun or verb not usually used as a name, spelled normally or not?

Tally - MC in Scott Westerfeld's Uglies. Um, that's a verb (and a noun) normally not used as a name. It's a FANTASTIC name. Also a best selling series.

Question 54: Does your character have the ability to shapeshift?

Never mind that this rules out any story about werewolves, but Modo from The Dark Deeps is a a shape shifting quasimodo character in a steampunk setting. TOTALLY original, fun, and one of the most sympathetic characters I've seen in a while.

So.

The Mary Sue phenom is real, but also a trope itself...."


I think Susan brings up a very helpful distinction--trope versus cliché.

Here's a useful definition:

"Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations. On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means 'stereotyped and trite.' In other words, dull and uninteresting."
--TV Tropes wiki homepage

Think of a trope as a genre rule. An element your audience expects to be present to make your work a fit for the genre.

For example, it is a trope for YA novels to feature a teenaged main character. No one would dream of calling it cliché to have your protagonist be 16, even if ten million other YA books do. Make your protagonist 47, however, and you're going to have problems convincing anyone your story is YA.

I think one could easily go through the "Mary Sue litmus test" and find some aspects that the testmakers labeled "Mary Sue" traits are actually EXPECTED in some genres. To not include these tropes would put your work out of synch with the genre and make it harder to sell.

What do you think? Which elements labeled "Mary Sue" in the test would you argue are viable tropes and for which genres?

Are elements of wish fulfillment part of audience expectation for your genre? How so?
Thursday, December 16, 2010 Laurel Garver
My Tuesday post, "No Mary Sues: operating at maximum capacity," was intended to get you all thinking about ways to keep your characters perpetually striving towards goals, or at least pondering them, worrying them, feeling strongly about them--rather than letting characters give up and walk away too quickly when conflicts arise.

I'd used the term "Mary Sue" in my title, believing this to be the proper term for the coddled character. I linked THIS "Mary Sue litmus test" which seemed to take the term in a somewhat different direction. The testmakers identified Mary Sue as a "wish fulfillment character" who is not only coddled, but also too precious by half--too much fantasy, not enough reality.

Turns out this link was only very peripherally connected to my point, but it did generate some intriguing concerns and questions in your comments.

Susan Kaye Quinn @ Ink Spells said:

"I think you have to be a little careful with the Mary Sue generalization (like any sweeping definition, especially one with so many requirements). It is undeniably true that Mary Sue characters exist, just like any stereotype. But just because your character may have a "Mary Sue" type characteristic doesn't make them an egregious thing that must be banished from the face of the earth (I think the authors of the test even say this).

Ex:
Question 1.e. Does your character's name ...
Involve a noun or verb not usually used as a name, spelled normally or not?

Tally - MC in Scott Westerfeld's Uglies. Um, that's a verb (and a noun) normally not used as a name. It's a FANTASTIC name. Also a best selling series.

Question 54: Does your character have the ability to shapeshift?

Never mind that this rules out any story about werewolves, but Modo from The Dark Deeps is a a shape shifting quasimodo character in a steampunk setting. TOTALLY original, fun, and one of the most sympathetic characters I've seen in a while.

So.

The Mary Sue phenom is real, but also a trope itself...."


I think Susan brings up a very helpful distinction--trope versus cliché.

Here's a useful definition:

"Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations. On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means 'stereotyped and trite.' In other words, dull and uninteresting."
--TV Tropes wiki homepage

Think of a trope as a genre rule. An element your audience expects to be present to make your work a fit for the genre.

For example, it is a trope for YA novels to feature a teenaged main character. No one would dream of calling it cliché to have your protagonist be 16, even if ten million other YA books do. Make your protagonist 47, however, and you're going to have problems convincing anyone your story is YA.

I think one could easily go through the "Mary Sue litmus test" and find some aspects that the testmakers labeled "Mary Sue" traits are actually EXPECTED in some genres. To not include these tropes would put your work out of synch with the genre and make it harder to sell.

What do you think? Which elements labeled "Mary Sue" in the test would you argue are viable tropes and for which genres?

Are elements of wish fulfillment part of audience expectation for your genre? How so?