Agency means a condition of being in action, instrumental, or possessing some kind of power. It can incorporate not only making decisions, but the belief that we (or our characters) have choice. If we think about it, if there aren’t options, then by default, our characters have no power and are not making any decisions. They are the flotsam and jetsam being flung along by the currents of Fate.

Code for “boring.”

I’ve been editing fiction for over twenty years, and one of the biggest problems I see with new writers is that the “story” is really just a series of bad things happening. There is no agency. The character is totally reactive. To a degree, this is fine in the opening salvos of the story.

To a degree.

If we parse apart novel structure, what we will see (especially with good stories) is that there is a steady progression of agency that flows in tandem with rising pushback, higher stakes, and a steadily compressed ticking clock.

My favorite writing instructor for plot is Larry Brooks. His “How To” Story Engineering, for me, was a game changer. For years I knew how to edit a plot, but when I sat down to write, everything just sort of fell apart. I’d read craft books or take classes and, what seemed so simple and doable, always turned to utter mush roughly 25,000 to 30,000 words in.

Many of you might know what I am talking about.

You come up with a BRILLIANT story idea and begin writing. The first 10,000 words are amazing! The words flow and you write until you think your hands might fall off.

By about 15,000 to 20,000 you begin losing steam.

After 28,000 to 30,000 it starts feeling like it might be easier to do brain surgery from space…with an egg beater. #KillMeNow

Why is that?

Structure and Agency

I love, love, love the way Larry teaches us how to think about plot (and recommend the book, obviously). He gave me a simple way of thinking about all my stories in a way that keeps me always moving forward.

Additionally, if I do get stuck, I can quickly diagnose WHY and where and how I am going wrong.

I prefer to think of story in five acts (just an expansion of Aristotelian three-act structure).

The opening is Normal World. This is usually pretty short, especially in our modern age where audiences have the attention span of a crack addicted fruit fly…that also happens to have severe ADD.

Yet, Normal World is CRITICAL. This is where we (the audience) will meet the protagonist we are supposed to care about enough to dedicate time, money and attention we don’t have for an average of 12-15 hours. It is also where we get an idea of the problem this character will have to face and overcome to be rightfully called a hero.

In the LOTR (Lord of the Rings), we begin in the Shire. Why? Because we have to actually care about the Hobbits and the Shire. We cannot be vested in a people and place we don’t know.

The inciting incident, introduces the core story problem. If there is no hint that Sauron is alive and well and living in Beverly Hills Mount Doom, there really is no point to us even meeting Gandalf and the Hobbits. But keep in mind, no decision has yet been made.

When Gandalf sticks a ring Frodo inherits into the fire, he only believes the ring possibly maybe might be THE RING. For Frodo and Samwise, the adventure has not yet begun.

In Normal World, the character will have very little to no agency…until…

Turning Point to Act One: Agency Sparked

The inciting incident reveals a fork in the road. This is where the MC’s life bifurcates. One road leads to retaining the status quo. The other road leads to adventure.

Yet, the character must choose of their own free will to set out on adventure.

Events cannot simply fling them ahead. Granted, they will be signing up for far more than they can handle, but (at the time) they don’t know that. They also need to have some vague idea of what the adventure entails. To toss characters out into the world and push them from point to point is NOT dramatic tension.

It’s soap opera writing.

Which is fine for fan fiction (episodic writing), but not great for novels, novellas, short stories or screenplays.

When Frodo and Samwise leave the Shire, their goal is NOT to destroy the Ring of Power in Mount Doom. It is far simpler. It is simply to meet Gandalf at The Prancing Pony. While scary and out of the comfort zone, it is (to them) still doable. Additionally, they know the adventure is in some way tethered to a ring dangerous enough to even scare the great Gandalf the Grey.

Act One: Running

In Act One, our MC will be largely reactive. They don’t yet believe they have agency, though they still must exercise it for a good story.

For instance, Gandalf doesn’t force Frodo and Samwise to meet him. They agree to leave the safety of the Shire.

Additionally, it isn’t Frodo and Samwise’s fault they miss Gandalf at the rendezvous point. However, they must choose to trust Strider. They have to choose to either stay at The Prancing Pony (or return after the Black Riders have left and hide) OR to follow a stranger they don’t know into the wild.

We authors must always provide opportunities where, if the character(s) makes a decision, one decision pushes the narrative forward and the other ends the story.

What Does this Look Like?

For instance, in the movie Labyrinth, we meet Sarah faffing off in a park in costume reciting lines from a play. In Normal World, Sarah is flaky, entitled, immature (but also clearly hurting).

The inciting incident is when she discovers her missing teddy bear and decides to be emotional and take her out anger on her infant brother. She chooses to recite the call to the Goblin King to take her baby brother.

Granted, she has zero clue it will work, BUT when it does work and David Bowie materializes—looking far too sexy for a grown ass man in makeup and big hair—and offers her a chance to have all her dreams…the story truly begins.

One decision lets him rule her, give her all she ever desires…if she only turns over her baby brother. The other decision is to race against the clock and see if she can rescue her brother from the center of the labyrinth.

Obviously, if she gives up baby brother, the story ends. And an entire generation of preteen girls, myself included, took 25 years to work out why she didn’t grab the deal.

Quick Note on Labyrinth

Movies can be a lot of fun to study, especially good ones. If you haven’t seen Labyrinth or have slept since then, I recommend going back and watching. I learn something new every time. In fact, the last time I watched it I learned a whole new level I’d missed, but had been there all along.

Roll with this and indulge me, it’s actually cool/important.

Sarah arrives late to babysit her brother. We (the audience) are somewhat misled. The stepmother points out exactly what Sarah’s problem is. Sarah is stuck and not growing up normally. The stepmother tells Sarah that she can say if she has plans, that they want her to have plans and she should have her own plans, but Sarah balks. She treats her like the evil stepmother out of a storybook no matter what she says.

Dad backs up stepmother. This event is what drives Sarah into a temper tantrum.

But pay attention.

Dad is obviously remarried and remarried long enough to have an 18 month old baby. One would assume, given the times, that Dad and Stepmother had dated and married before the 9-10 months to have the brother. This means a minimum of 2.5 to as much as 3 or more years has passed since Sarah’s mother was in the picture.

My entire life, I assumed Mom had died, since Hollywood loved killing off parents. Watch the introduction when she is in her room. Played at normal speed, we see playbills with the mother and even with Sarah.

Okay, so mom was an actress and daughter is a theater nerd following in mom’s footsteps.

Or is she?

Now PAUSE the MOVIE

Now, go back and rewatch and hit PAUSE. If you do this, the entire story changes. Pay attention to the newspaper clippings taped in her vanity mirror, the clippings that at normal speed I’d assumed were likely an obituary or newspaper articles about a famous but now dead mother.

Whose face do you see?

JARETH, the Goblin King.

In among the articles and scrapbook clippings a whole new story emerges.

Jareth looks just like the mother’s costar. What now seems far more likely is the mother ran off with another man and abandoned her daughter at roughly age 12-13…exactly the time she should have started transitioning into adulthood.

This is a whole other level of emotional damage.

It now makes perfect sense why Sarah is emotionally moored in childhood. Additionally, a sparkly, charismatic man offering to take care of her if she sacrifices a child in her care, has a whole new twist.

If great movies understand the power of Normal World, we should too. Every story should introduce the Big Boss Troublemaker right from the start.

In Labyrinth we get this in the park where she’s reciting the final lines to take down the Goblin King. BUT, we ALSO see him again in her bedroom in the moments before she recites the incantation that sets off all events from there.

Act One: REACTIVE

Once our MC decides to step out on adventure, sure, there will be a lot they cannot control. Yet, they still must have agency, meaning options.

New writers can be very bad about making the MC far too passive. They have no other choice but to do X, Y, Z. This is author intrusion.

Now, I am not suggesting to make the options silly. The Hobbits aren’t choosing between trusting Strider and certain death. They could circle back to the inn for shelter or decide to hide in the woods and wait it out for Gandalf. The choices might suck, but they are at least doable.

Agency is limited in Act One because not only should we have a plot arc, but a character arc. If characters are too perfect and can handle everything the story throws their way with dignity and aplomb? That is a snooze fest.

There has to be something emotionally undeveloped that must change by the end of the story.

For the Hobbits, they believe their happiness and fulfillment lies in adventure, in anywhere BUT the Shire. The very place they despise for being boring will be the one place they’ll (eventually) be willing to sacrifice their lives to save from certain destruction.

For Sarah, she’s stuck in nostalgia and is refusing to evolve. Again, when she steps into the magical realm, who does she meet? Hoggle. Again, Hoggle tells her what her problem is, but she is not yet matured enough to appreciate the advice. He tells her, “You take too much for granted.”

Taking things for granted is a hallmark of childhood. It is, in fact, a mark of ZERO AGENCY.

Act Two: Warrior

Act One is relatively short. How do we spot the turning point to Act Two? This is when the MC shifts from running to fighting. In Act One, circumstances bigger than them are beating the hell out of them. They fight back but are really hitting in the dark. They are unaware of what the larger story problem is and probably still unaware of their character flaws that are holding them back.

Act Two is when some sort of event or information changes the MC’s perspective and their level of agency. They go to being a mix of reactive and increasingly proactive.

When the Hobbits take refuge with the elves, Gandalf confirms that Sauron is back and there is only way to stop him. At this point, the Hobbits still can go BACK to the Shire. Rather, they willingly decide to keep going. Frodo will bear the Ring and Samwise will act as a helper/bodyguard.

In Labyrinth, Sarah is stuck in an oubliette (a small prison cell). The adventure has effectively ended. Hoggle comes to her aid and is happy to lead her back home and out of the labyrinth. If she goes home, story over. Yet, we are in Act Two. Sarah bribes Hoggle to help her solve the labyrinth.

She has effectively taken on a new level of agency.

Act Two will be the longest act. Again, I recommend Story Engineering. Larry has some great diagrams and formulas and examples. But, in Act Two, the thing we must remember is our characters must have increasing levels of agency.

NO CHEATING!

Maybe your character is far too perfect. Or the opposite. They don’t have any of the right answers…they are just luckier than a leprechaun dressed in a coat made of rabbit’s feet.

Bad thing happens—Oh no what will we do?—then some existing character or new character rescues them out of the mess at zero cost and with no effort from them.

NO.

This is the part of the book where many new writers decide to leave a convenient journal, video, have a new character appear with all the abilities and answers. NO.

Y’all might know I love horror (supernatural type books), and I read…a lot. Recently, I listened to a book with a premise that had a lot of promise. I couldn’t finish it.

The characters had no agency. Instead of them actively having to find answers to why crazy/life-threatening stuff was happening in their basement, the author used a crap ton of seriously convenient “dream sequences” that served as flashbacks to spoon feed vital details.

NO.

Flashbacks are a sign of weak/lazy writing.

Before anyone argues with me, check out Why Flashbacks Ruin Fiction and Time as a Literary Device. Can we mess with time? Sure! I love doing that. But like all things in writing, the rules exist for a reason. There is a certain WAY to go about using time.

Tossing in hidden boxes of journals or videos slipping in dream sequences absolves the characters of responsibility. In short, it takes away agency. Handing characters the answers all-but-spelled-out is cheating.

Bright Idea Fairies and Agency

Since Act Two IS so long, you’ll have what are called “pinch points.” This marks how our character is not only progressing along via plot, but how they are emotionally maturing. Since they are not yet fully evolved, they’ll try to rely on their old ways of thinking. They haven’t yet come to understand that their old habits/worldview etc. is precisely part of the problem.

Which is why, as they are trying to solve the core story problem, they will have what I call “bright idea fairies.”

Usually the “bright idea fairy” will be in some way related to the character flaw. If your MC is a workaholic who needs to appreciate life and family, expect them to orchestrate events where they can have BOTH (Inviting the wife and kids to a company event).

Maybe your MC is a fighter. Their instinct will be to fight. If they hide and avoid, they’ll look for better ways to hide and avoid. If they’re a control freak, they’ll keep white-knuckling and refuse to trust others and delegate.

In Labyrinth, Sarah is taking on increasing levels of responsibility, but not enough. She is still far too reliant on her allies.

Bright Idea Fairies (BIFs) are directly responsible for the False Victory and, by default, the Darkest Moment.

The False Victory is the Big Boss BIF, the brightest of the Bright Idea Fairies. It is the last event that should prove to our MC they must make those final changes that transform them from a lowly MC (protagonist) into a hero.

The Darkest Moment is where everything has failed and the protagonist is dumped unceremoniously at the final crossroad. One road leads home (and to failure), the other plunges ahead into certain death (or at least implied certain death).

Agency Unleashed: Act Three HERO

After the darkest moment, we usually see the rally of the allies. Once everything has been stripped away, what matters is restored. HOWEVER. The difference here is that the hero finally understands they must go it alone. Only ONE character can take on the Big Boss Troublemaker.

***Or two if this is a Buddy Love structure like LOTR or a romance. Yet, the two have effectively become one. In romance, guy and gal must come together if they hope to be victorious. Yes, they can spend the entire book driving each other bonkers BUT they must come together like VOLTRON in order to win.

This is the climax of the story. The odds should be total sh!t. In fact, the worse the odds, the better the story. That and time should be almost out. If the MC fails, super bad things need to happen or we will not care.

These can be large-scale catastrophic implications. Sauron rules Middle Earth and destroys all Frodo and Samwise hold dear, OR personal catastrophic implications. Sarah loses her little brother forever.

By Act Three, your character has ditched the old self and is now battling the BBT (Big Boss Troublemaker) on new terms. Frodo and Samwise willingly accept a suicide mission to protect the Shire.

Sarah goes in to face Jareth on her own. How does she win? She claims her AGENCY.

“You have no power over me.”

Once she finally realizes that Jareth only has as much power as she has been willing to relinquish, he loses his hold over her.

The Denoument: Agency Realized

After the battle is won, the world might be in shambles but everything has changed for the better. Yes, the end of every Marvel movie means some big city is reduced to rubble, but the greater threat has been neutralized.

At the end of LOTR, we see an interesting bookending in the movie.

In the beginning, the Hobbits (mistakenly) believe adventure outside of the Shire is the key to personal fulfillment. They are naive and childlike which is largely why Sauron never offered them jewelry.

He underestimated that the very qualities that nearly get them killed (frying bacon on a mountain with dead kings on their trail) is also what makes them remarkably resilient to the sway of the Ring (and arguably the only reason they succeed when all other races have failed).

Yet, there is a cost.

Unlike the opening in Normal World, our heroes aren’t bouncing along getting into mischief. They sit, somber and broken at a table, forever changed. Their fellow Hobbits laugh and drink and joke in the background, oblivious to the sacrifice these Hobbits made to make that a reality.

They have learned that self-serving adventure is not the secret to happiness, rather sacrificial love is the key to joy.

The book is vastly different than the movies. In the book, the Shire does not survive in tact.

It is razed, and the Hobbits killed or enslaved. Life is no longer beautiful and innocent. Those in the Shire live in fear and are barely surviving.

Our band of heroes return expecting a hero’s welcome only to come to the horrible realization the battle is far from over. The biggest fight is yet to come. They must liberate the Hobbits and rebuild what remains of their home.

That said, while everything they knew and took for granted is obliterated, they can finally rebuild in a world that is no longer under constant threat.

Unlike the other Hobbits who have bowed down to their oppressors, Frodo, Samwise, Merry and Pippin pass on their lessons and show their fellow Hobbits they have more power than they know.

Using Agency in Our Writing

The key thing to remember about agency is that our character must always be actively involved in the decision making process. They can and WILL make a lot of bad decisions. Yet, over time, as they mature, these decisions will vastly improve.

I use this when I am writing. It doesn’t matter if we are a plotter who loves outlines or a pantser (write by the seat of our pants). In fact, for the pansters here, having an understanding of agency is KEY. It’s likely even more important since we rely more on intuition to write.

I am a Plotser

That means I create a log-line that says, overall, what my story is ABOUT. But it serves as a guideline to keep me pointed in the correct direction. If I know (usually by word count) that I am well into Act Two, then I know when my MC is being too passive.

Are they relying too much on others? Do they still react to everything as opposed to becoming increasingly proactive? Am I offering actual choices to my character, or am I just letting them drift along the riptide of bad situations? Am I cheating and allowing my characters to rely too much on luck?

Trust me. All these years later, I still have to delete sections because I recognize either the character is too evolved for so early in my story OR they need to do better because they can’t be so passive and dull-witted halfway into Act Two.

I hope you will now watch movies and read books with fresh eyes. Being a writer is a fabulous calling because watching movies, series, and reading books are all considered professional development.

I guarantee that if you see a story that breaks these rules, it is probably a story you either struggled to finish or didn’t like (but might not have been able to articulate WHY you didn’t like it.)

What are Your Thoughts?

Does this idea of agency help you better understand story flow? How you can use it to ratchet dramatic tension? Few things will make us turn pages like a character who has decisions but is making the wrong ones. Conversely, few things will turn us off like a character who keeps making the wrong decisions and fails to ever learn.

Does this help you in a place where you are stuck? Maybe offer some insights into how you can up the stakes? Can you now see better why you loved some stories or grew tired of others?

If we think about agency in terms we are familiar with, what comes to mind. Literary agent? This is a person with power we don’t have to make decisions where we cannot. Now zoom in on that feeling and make sure it’s in your stories.

I love hearing from you!

And remember, my perennial author branding book, Rise of the Machines: Human Authors in a Digital World and my mystery thriller The Devil’s Dance are both on sale on Kindle right now for only .99. Also please grab a copy of Larry’s book! Especially for those who struggle with plot.

Whether it is comments, shares, sales, or reviews, these are the things that keep us content producers (and authors) going and able to keep delivering. I always appreciate your support and love being able to keep doing this for you!

The post Agency: The Critical Component of ALL Great Stories appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

‘Gaslighting’ is a term I’ve used for YEARS. Oddly, however, until recently, almost nobody knew what the heck I was talking about. I would have to explain about the movie from the 1940s, based off a 1938 play Gas Light.

Anyway, it would just turn into a rambling conversation almost as awkward as when I pitched my first ‘novel.’

For those who’ve not seen the movie or the play, I strongly recommend it because it dovetails into what I’d like us to discuss today. My archives are bursting at the seams with posts on plotting, scenes and sequels, themes, setting, etc. And NOT to say I won’t write on these topics again.

But, what I am striving for here, is a truly MEATY blog that digs deeper, plumbs the depths of our psychology, and simply offers more.

***For instance, take my last post. How does our story/character(s) change if we introduce a profound mother wound?

Today, we’re going to talk about a staple character in fiction—the narcissist—and one of the most powerful weapons they wield to get what they want. Remember, I am not a psychiatrist, I just play one on the internet .

Really GREAT storytellers are masters at noticing and unpacking the human condition.

Psychologically healthy, stable people, who always make rational, responsible decisions make for boring stories. So let’s spice things up, shall we?

Gaslighting: What IS It?

Mental health professionals also refer to gaslighting as ambient abuse.

The mental health community, as well as popular culture, appropriated the term ‘gaslighting’ from the classic play/movie.

In the story, Gas Light, the female MC is newly married and her husband insists they move into her aunt’s London apartment. The aunt is recently deceased and has willed the apartment to the MC.

Since this is Victorian England, gas lamps light most streets and homes.

Put a pin in here.

Before roughly the 1950s or maybe a little later, it was not uncommon for male family members to commit female relations (wife, mother, sister, daughter, etc.) into insane asylums for any number of reasons that had NOTHING to do with mental health. The burden of proof for ‘insanity’ was extremely low, especially for the wealthy who could afford ‘care.’

Besides, good luck disproving a negative. If someone labels you crazy, the more you try to prove you’re sane, well, the crazier you look, right?

Anyway…

Back to Gas Light...

In the story, the husband—for reasons I won’t go into here—is actively laying the groundwork to have his wife committed. To do this, he would, say, give her a really expensive necklace. She’d tuck it away in her vanity then, without her knowing, he’d move/hide it.

Later, he’d manufacture a reason for her to wear the necklace, but of course it’s missing. Once she was good and hysterical tearing the house apart, he’d berate her for being so absent-minded, then smugly go to the vanity and—VOILA!

Guess what was there all along?

He’d follow these stunts with lots of comments to express his care. “Are you feeling well?” “You know how you’ve not been yourself.” “Why don’t you go lie down?”

Husband continues to move/hide paintings, furniture, jewelry, common household items and all along acts as if his wife is losing touch with reality. The coups de gras, however, is with the gas lamps.

Every evening, when he leaves for his ‘walk’ the gas lamps noticeably dim. Not only does this make it hard for her to see, but she’s also hearing noises/footsteps from their third floor (which has been closed off and supposedly has no outside access).

Suffice to say, Husband is waging a psychological warfare campaign to persuade his wife (and witnesses) that she’s losing her mind and, thus, needs to be sent away for professional care.

Gaslighting by Degrees

Just like last week, the way we might use gaslighting in a story can vary by genre. First, the narcissist can be represented by proxy. Used this way, the ‘narcissistic force’ believes the ends justify the means and is willing to fabricate the facts and ruthlessly enforce a false narrative to achieve certain goal(s).

In the classic dystopian novel 1984, the government is gaslighting the public.

Thus, if one is writing a political thriller, a dystopian, a science fiction, then a system/structure doing the gaslighting is a mainstay. Regardless what the ‘people’ in your story see with their own eyes, the propaganda machine is there to say it isn’t real and, therefore, something must be wrong with anyone who dares disagree.

Now, I know it’s very easy for us to say, “NO WAY! This could never happen to me.” But, I’d recommend reading up on the Asch conformity experiments. Solomon Asch wanted test the threshold of conformity, as in how long could we hold onto a belief before the group superseded what one saw as ‘true’?

To simplify.

I draw a line on a board that’s slightly crooked. I recruit hidden actors to say the line is straight no matter what. You, however, insist the line is crooked. So, how LONG do you maintain the line is crooked as more and more people join the group avidly claiming the line is, in fact, straight?

How long until you at least questioned what you were seeing?

Maybe YOU would never change your answers, but read up on the studies. The pressure to conform is more powerful than I find comfortable.

This said, gaslighting is a LOT more common in fiction than we might realize. “Area-51 is just a base.” “There’s no such thing as aliens.” “Bat boy doesn’t exist.”

***Okay, I know I lost some of you there. BATBOY IS DEF REAL!

How much of this gaslighting narrative creates the foundation for some of our most beloved sci-fi? Stranger Things, Stargate, X-Files, anyone?

Gaslighting is the beating heart of coverups and government conspiracies so obviously, when done on a mass-scale, it’s essential world-building for many genres.

But what about when we are dealing with individuals?

The Many Kinds of Narcissists

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a narcissist is “an extremely self-centered person who has an exaggerated sense of self-importance.” Not all are crazy or violent. Some are well-meaning (in their own minds) as we’ll see.

Their self-absorption can come from psychological immaturity or they don’t believe they can get what they want unless they manipulate. Not all narcissists are gaslighting ‘intentionally.’

Why am I mentioning narcissists? Because gaslighting is a go-to tactic for getting what they want. This said, there is a WIDE range of narcissists to work with, which helps because different genres require narcissists of the appropriate stripe.

If we are writing lighter fiction, say comedy or sweet romance, then simply adding in a person who only thinks about him or herself (without regard to any consequences) works great.

In the lighter genres, we are NOT casting someone with a diagnosable personality disorder. They’re simply self-centered to the point of social blindness.

Think about the comedy classic, What About, Bob? Bob (Bill Murray) is an overly dependent neurotic patient with obsessive compulsive disorder who tracks down his successful therapist when his therapist tries to go on vacation.

The blind spots alone in this movie make for plenty of laughs. But, Bob is SO dependent, so fixated on his own needs, that he cannot see how utterly inappropriate his behaviors are.

In a sweet romance, writers might cast the heartless boss, the mother who’s a relentless match-maker (because SHE wants grand-babies), or the ruthless workaholic investor who doesn’t care who he screws over to land the deal.

***And, before anyone shouts about cliches, cliches are cliches because they WORK. The kicker is writing them well enough that people don’t see them/or care. It is all in the execution.

Gaslighting and Story Problems

Thus, the heartless boss could claim he has no memory your MC had a wedding to attend and her carefully submitted forms don’t exist in the system. Either she works the weekend or she’s fired (tampering with her memory).

The matchmaking mother will claim total innocence, that all her meddling is perfectly innocent, when she knows full well it isn’t. But, needs must.

Our ruthless investor can act as if the property manager didn’t submit the historic papers on time, thus the property is to be demolished for a new condo.

All of these scenarios can be tweaked with casting, setting and we have countless variations to work with. Since the audience has likely dealt with a person in their REAL lives who have acted similarly, this creates resonance.

***For those who’ve seen Glengarry Glen Ross (image above), the entire plot is a gaslighting. There never were any good leads.

Gaslighting can offer up some rough gems we can shape and polish into a story worthy of every storyline from Hallmark, to slapstick to psychological mind-benders and blood chillers.

Comedy & Horror

Gaslighting is a go-to for the narcissist as a tool to get what they want. If we are looking at a comedic character like Bob, from What About Bob? then this is simply a person with highly a warped sense of reality. He projects whatever inappropriate action he’s doing as totally normal and insists it’s actually his target (the therapist) who’s not ‘seeing clearly.’

In fact, insisting someone isn’t seeing/experiencing something is a REALLY common comedy trope.

Tallageda Nights comes to mind.

But comedy and horror are the closest of bedfellows. What do you get when horror is TOO over the top? Comedy. Conversely, what about when a joke/prank goes horribly wrong? Horror.

Once you know what genre you’re writing and start to cast characters, you’ll know what sort of narcissist you’ll need and the ways they’ll use gaslighting to get what they want.

Obviously, as we tread into grittier general fiction, psychological thrillers, thrillers, suspense-thrillers, crime fiction, etc. the narcissist we’ll see more often is the clinical version. Someone with, say, NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

This manipulator might be gaslighting unintentionally but, for a good villain, that’s a hard sell. These narcissists see people as pawns to push around a chess board. Others are merely a means to getting what they want.

Narcissists and Gaslighting

Narcissists come in a variety of packages from the overly self-absorbed the ‘clinical’ territory (psychopaths). Psychopathy not a diagnosable mental health disorder according to the DSM-V, yet we all know this is a real thing and professionals can diagnostically measure via assessments.

For gritty fiction or any of the darker sides of the genre spectrum, the ways, the degree, and to what ends the narcissist gaslights changes accordingly.

First of all, a story is only as strong as the BBT (Big Boss Troublemaker). Not all BBTs are villains, though in certain genres, they usually are. This person forms the entire POINT of the story, so I strongly recommend reading the hyperlinked post above.

We (as a reader) must fear and respect the narcissist. Sociopaths and psychopaths are masters of manipulation. If we do our jobs right, our readers will be strapped into the Rollercoaster from Hell alongside your protagonist. WE should be questioning reality if your narcissist is worth his/her salt.

Gaslighting is a highly destructive tool that can cause permanent harm. Refer to my post about how lies change the structure of the brain. Remember the entire point of gaslighting is to make the victim (and those around who might possibly render aid) question themselves, their memory, their sanity.

What makes gaslighting particularly insidious is it extremely difficult to detect . For brevity’s sake, this post has a FABULOUS (okay, TERRIFYING) list of ways narcissists gaslight and the common things they say.

Gaslighting Escalates

Gaslighting always starts small. This is to test if the victim/target has enough self-awareness, strong enough self-esteem to call the narcissist on their bull$!@. Anyone can be a target. Your character might have been otherwise strong/self-aware, but has recently suffered a loss or major life change and is in an emotionally vulnerable state.

Narcissists smell blood in the water.

Frequently, the gaslighter will begin by simply denying your feelings/experiences. You are just so sensitive. Why are you blaming me for your ex? You’re too needy. No one wants you around because you’re too controlling.

***Keep in mind, if the gaslighting remains at THIS stage, alone, it can still be seriously damaging.

This then could possibly escalate to moving your belongings, only for those belongings to reappear in the original spot or some bizarre place no sane person would put that item.

Then, the items (usually something important/treasured) never reappear. The narcissist throws them away, pawns them, gives them away, or maybe keeps them as trophies.

Gaslighting can graduate to more obvious emotional and verbal abuse. The aggressor says the most horrible things, then when you get upset, they act completely befuddled why you’re upset and/or might flat out denying the event ever happened. They will claim you’re tired, over-sensitive, or can’t take a joke.

But, they don’t BEGIN here. They have to prime the person, have them good and rattled before bringing out the bigger guns.

Bigger Guns

A main tactic is to always keep you on the defensive. Remember what I said earlier, you cannot disprove a negative. Narcissists can be among the most dangerous people on the planet, so nothing is off the table when they lock onto their prey.

They’ll accuse the victim of lying, stealing, cheating, not loving them enough, not being attentive enough. And they will do so in ways the victim cannot make a viable defense.

A lover might accuse her partner of cheating, but when he shows her his phone to prove his innocence, she waves a receipt for a disposable phone. One that, of course, HE didn’t buy, but good luck proving it.

The goal is to have the victim SO rattled they are hyper-vigilant and always a) gathering evidence of their innocence or b) actively trying to do ‘enough’ to appease the narcissist.

They dance and dance and dance because, over time, and without knowing, they’ve turned into a puppet the narcissist can make perform on a whim.

Character Assassination

Should the narcissist launch a particularly viscous gaslighting campaign, be certain they won’t do it alone. They will enlist others to buttress their version of reality. The more witnesses on their side, the more the victim spirals into despair and self-doubt.

If you have one glass of wine at home with dinner, the narcissist might do something horrible then a) claim it never happened, you were too drunk to remember b) play the victim because you were blackout drunk. No matter how much you protest you had ONE glass—or even NO glasses of wine—who is going to believe you?

If you’re at home, he’ll have the ‘evidence.’ If you’re out with friends, the narcissist will suggest (compassionately and with deep concern) that you’re a closet alcoholic. He’ll be the long-suffering companion who’s still supporting you even though you cannot see you have a problem.

Look no farther than the psychological thriller The Girl on the Train for prime examples.

Should your MC take any type of medication—psychiatric medication in particular— that can/will be easily weaponized. God forbid your MC have any displeasing emotion—sadness, disappointment, righteous anger—lest the narcissist ask if you’ve taken your meds.

Gaslighting & Weaponizing the Well-Meaning

Narcissists can use gaslighting to weaponize well-meaning people. Say, the MC has had enough, is wise to the game and *cringes* confronts their abuser. Do NOT put it past the abuser to inflict some sort of self-injury then call the authorities claiming THEY are the victim.

Police are unlikely to have much sympathy for the person who isn’t bleeding and bruised and claiming the ‘victim’ ‘threw themselves down the stairs.’

Or maybe the narcissist lovingly brings your MC a glass of juice, but it’s filled with crushed Xanax (for which your MC has no prescription). The abuser calls the ambulance in the nick of time and insists on a psych hold and drug counseling. They had NO idea the MC was on PILLS!

Once a person hands any abuser the keys to the kingdom regarding their SANITY? Good luck digging out of that. Medical personnel, social workers, mental health workers can all become benevolent soldiers in the narcissist’s campaign.

And, once a narcissist has their victim publicly labeled as mentally unstable, unable to care for themselves, an addict, an abuser, a pervert, a cheater, a liar, a thief? There is almost no end to the level of destruction they can unleash.

We’ll talk more on that on a different post.

In the End

Gaslighting is only one of many tools a narcissist can use to get what they want. Again, remember your genre. In Season One, Episode 19 of Desperate Housewives, Susan’s mother is ditzy, immature, self-centered, over sexual and has zero respect for boundaries.

So, Susan’s mother ambushes her with two men in the living room, Mom insists she was trying to HELP! It was a double date, and Susan is the one always overreacting and a stick in the mud.

This is a FAR cry from the gaslighting psychological warfare campaign in far darker stories like Misery, Fear, Sleeping with the Enemy, or Single White Female. In books? Aside from the dystopian mainstays, I recommend Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn, The Guest List by Lucy Foley, I Eat Men Like Air by Alice Berman, and Rock, Paper, Scissors by Alice Feeny to name a few.

Thoughts on Gaslighting?

Did you know what gaslighting was? Are you surprised to see how common it is in fiction? Did learning about the different types of narcissists and the way they mess with reality spark any good story ideas?

Anything y’all would like to add? Obviously, for time’s sakes, I cannot cover everything, so feel free to chime in.

I love hearing from you, and to show my appreciation…

CONTEST

What do you WIN? For the month of MAY, for everyone who leaves a comment, I will put your name in a hat. If you comment and link back to my blog on your blog, you get your name in the hat twice.

The Prize?

The unvarnished truth from yours truly. I will pick a winner once a month and it will be a critique of the first 20 pages of your novel, or your query letter, or your synopsis (5 pages or less).

***April’s winner is Maria D’Marco. Thank you for your comments! Please email your 5,000 word WORD doc, double-spaced, Times New Roman, to kristen at wana intl dot com. Put CONTEST WINNER in the subject line so I can see you.

CLASSES!

***All classes come with a FREE recording

Bring on the BINGE: How to Plot & Write a Series

Thursday, May 19, 2022 7-9:30 P.M. NYC Time

For more information, SIGN UP HERE.

The Art of Character: Writing Characters for a SERIES

Thursday, May 26th 7:00-10:00 P.M. NYC Time

For more information, SIGN UP HERE.

Practice Your Pitch: Master the Log-Line

Thursday, June 2nd, 7:00-9:00 P.M. NYC Time. This is a TWO-HOUR INTERACTIVE WORKSHOP!

For more information, SIGN UP HERE.

The post Gaslighting: Narcissists & Tampering with Reality appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

Characters are critical for stories that resonate. Why? Because characters are the conduit that connects the reader and vests them in the story problem. They’re the emotional touchstone that allows for catharsis, because—when written well—it doesn’t matter if the character is a space alien or a federal agent, we (readers) can relate to them in some way.

We can’t empathize with technology, spaceships, magic, or nuclear submarines. Humans can’t bond emotionally to a place (without the characters as the connection).

For instance, we CARE about Lord of the Rings’ Middle Earth because we care about Frodo, Samwise and Gandalf. And, because Frodo, Samwise and Gandalf care deeply for Middle Earth and the Shire…we do as well.

Story is like the wall socket that’s connected a tremendous power source. But, how useful would those wall sockets be if all the gadgets in everyday life didn’t have plugs? How useful would a bunch of dead gadgets be?

We cannot have story without characters and can’t, conversely, have characters (DIMENSIONAL characters) without story.

Readers read stories, but great stories read the readers.

***I know we’ve talked about all this before, but since I am pathologically honest, I feel the need to tell on myself. I cracked a back tooth and had major dental work last week. With all the drugs? I actually have a completely new post almost finished, but it’s been like pulling teeth…bada bump snare.

*cries*

So please forgive the refresher.

Moving on…

Great Characters are What They DO

One of my mantras in life and in fiction is, ‘Talk is cheap.’ Probably the single largest mistake I see in newbie fiction is the writer insists on telling us a character is this or that instead of showing the character being this or that (then allowing us to be the judge).

Now, I do understand that we cannot write a book that is all showing. We do need some telling lest the book be a half million words long and unreadable. As authors, however, we are wise to hold back a little. Use restraint.

Let the audience do some of the work .

This allows readers to join in the experience, and metaphorically ‘complete the circuit.’

Remember, readers bond to characters via their own baggage and their own worldview. Well-written stories are a different experience for every reader, because we (humans) see the characters through infinitely varied lenses.

Ideally, audiences should see our characters through themselves.

This is how we can have a series like Game of Thrones (or A Song of Ice and Fire if we’re talking about the books) and fans have vastly different opinions about the characters.

Some fans LOVED Daenerys Targaryen. I couldn’t stand her. I actually liked Cersei Lannister, even though plenty of folks hated her.

Suffice to say that, whether it’s Harry Potter, Star Wars, Firefly, Battlestar Galactica, Friends, Marvel, DC, or Big Bang Theory, success can be largely attributed to fan-devotion to favorite characters.

How can characters hold so much power?

If we (the writer) assign moral judgement and TELL an audience this character is good and this one bad and this one a liar and this one a hero, we close that emotional expanse where imagination and empathy lead to bonding.

Half the POWER the characters wield is their baggage, the other half being the READER’S baggage.

We’re wise to leave room in the story for the audience to park their overpacked emotional U-Hauls.

Readers Imbue Emotional Energy

If we can learn to write characters in a way that they act out of their own wants, desires, wounds, blindspots, and shame, then we open the seam between fiction and reality.

Widen this seam enough, and the audience can fall into our story and become part of our world.

Great characters should have baggage, the more the better. They should also be acting out of this baggage. And, if we (Author God) will refrain from assigning any value judgement (telling) the characters will, as a result, become more complex.

Right now maybe you’re all saying, ‘Great, Kristen! Um, huh?’

When WE (the author) assign a value judgement, we are doing this based off OUR experiences, psychological makeups, wounds, etc. This limits how much the reader can participate by forming their own opinions.

If, however, we can practice restraint, the READERS will formulate their own assessments based off their wholly unique and infinitely varied experiences. In fact, that is a HUGE part of the fun.

It’s why we (fans) take The Sorting Hat Quiz over at Pottermore, or Facebook quizzes to tell us which Avenger we are or which character from Firefly we resemble most.

Back to Game of Thrones, though. Why did I ‘like’ Cersei Lannister despite her being a fairly horrible person?

Because of MY background.

‘Noble’ Qualities’

How audiences loved to hate Cersei. Yet, why did she resonate for me? Why did her character strike such a visceral chord? What made her dimensional and real instead of a paper doll/mustache-twirling caricature?

First, she possessed what I BELIEVED to be noble qualities. Cersei LOVED her family (her brother perhaps a bit too much for my comfort, but whatever).

I’ve always been deeply dedicated to family. Also, as a mother, I understood her motivations. She would do anything for her children. She’d stop at nothing to assist, promote, protect or even AVENGE them.

Literally.

She was fiercely devoted to her children (even a child as terrifying as Joffrey) and heaven help anyone who messed with her cubs. She’d melt you with wildfire…then drop a city on you.

For reals. She did it.

*Cersei drops mic then half of Westeros*

As a mom, I fully appreciate how vulnerable our children can make us. How blinded we can be to the faults of our kids.

Also, Cercei’s personality is a lot like mine. I don’t do anything in half-measures and neither did Cersei Lannister.

She Had a Sympathetic Viewpoint

Because of MY background, I felt Cersie possessed a highly sympathetic viewpoint. She was a woman in a man’s world, overlooked even in her own family.

Of all the Lannister children, SHE was the only one who paid attention, and who outpaced her brothers by a million miles regarding Rule with an Iron Fist/On an Iron Throne 101.

SHE was the Lannister most qualified to rule, but instead, her father handed her off like chattel to marry a fat, sloppy, philandering joke of a leader, King Robert Baratheon who openly disrespected her.

And it was that pervasive powerlessness—generated by the world she had no choice being born into—that pissed her off more than a little (and rightfully so).

I understood her frustrations.

Her one brother, Jaime, had more interest in prancing around the country playing ’emotionally wounded knight’ than protecting the realms, and the other brother, Tyrion–in the beginning at least–was a drunken, hard-partying cad who cared only about himself.

Men more ‘qualified’ to rule from the Iron Throne surrounded her—and by ‘more qualified’ I mean they had man parts.

The lion’s share of Cersei’s insane desire to gain the throne for one of her sons could be largely attributed to the fact that she believed she could rule vicariously through her sons who had the requisite ‘man parts.’

She believed that, if she could secure the Iron Throne, she could maintain the security they’d fought so hard and lost so much to win in the wars against The Mad King.

Of course after Season Six she was there to blow $#!& up and was all out of children. She made the High Sparrow into a smoking crater glowing hotter than a Chernobyl Ferris Wheel.

And that ‘Rule by Man Part Mandate’? She melted that, too…

A Character to Act Out MY Feelings

I knew what it felt like to live in a world where a woman wasn’t supposed to ‘outdo’ the men. I’ve been lectured plenty of times about ‘not knowing my place.’

Male family members constantly insinuated I couldn’t understand business even though I’d earned a degree in International Economics.

When I took the ASVAB for the Air Force, I scored 100% in mechanics and aced anything math-related. I’d just completed Honors Physics, because I had a strong interest in engineering.

Alas, the recruiters laughed when I asked about avionics because, ‘Didn’t I want to be a nurse?’

*sighs*

I spent most of my life in trouble with someone because I didn’t act a certain way. Like Cersei, I didn’t fit in, didn’t say the right things, act the right way, or have the right interests.

I didn’t understand WHY I was supposed to let ‘the men be in charge’ even when ‘the men’ weren’t competent.

That cost me a job…or four.

Characters: Mirror, Mirror on the Page

Great characters will act as a mirror for readers via the story problem(s) and how the characters interact with/respond to the world around them.

All stories are human stories, whether in space or in a magical realm. Characters (should) endure the same trauma and challenges that audiences do in life. This mirroring gives us (readers) a safe place to feel and process our emotions.

Going back to Cersei Lannister.

Cersei mirrored a lot of the frustrations I’d faced throughout my life, and this created a kinship that made me love her and forgive her even though she was utterly horrible.

I KNEW what it was like to be the best qualified person for the job, yet not even considered. I understood how frustrating it was to not be able to simply ASK for what I wanted or needed, to have to hint, suggest and ‘wheedle’ so I didn’t step on toes.

Manipulation is the tool/lever/weapon of those too weak to simply ask for/go after what they want.

Despite all this, I’m a very blunt person.

*shock face*

I know.

What you see is what you get. I suck at taking hints, so I don’t like hinting to others. If you need something? Ask. I’m aging here, and I don’t like wasting time guessing. If I hurt your feelings? Please just tell me so I can apologize, because I probably didn’t even mean to. That and I can make certain not to tromp on you again.

I despise manipulation. Yet, there was a time I had to learn how to ‘suggest’ and ‘hint’ if I wanted to get anything accomplished.

On top of all this? Like Cersie, I, too, have endured terrible consequences due to incompetent leadership, and been powerless to do anything about it for ONE REASON.

I was a female.

Characters & The Audience

This said, plenty of people loathed Cersie from the get-go. Ironically, I HATED her for the first three seasons or so. But, once I had enough story and context? *shrugs* She started to grow on me. I never agreed with her behavior, but I DID at least empathize with her motivations.

Just as I hated Robert Baratheon from the onset, because he reminded me of people who’ve caused me tremendous pain, Cersei Lannister could remind someone else of some tormentor in their life.

OR, it could be they didn’t share much in common.

THEIR life experiences, baggage, wounds, personalities made them bond to a different character that told ‘their story’ instead.

The skilled writer understands human narcissism. We are a self-absorbed bunch.

That’s why we long for stories where we can see a bit of ourselves reflected back. This is the danger with creating one-dimensional characters.

Newer writers, not yet skilled in the art of mischief and mayhem, tend to gravitate to the extremes. We have super-perfect characters pitted against utterly horrible villains.

Unfortunately, black-and-white is boring and predictable.

Superman Syndrome

Superman, in my POV, is a Mary Sue. He has all these superpowers—strength, speed, he can fly, possesses x-ray vision, etc. Superman is also handsome, noble, kind, wholesome, and dedicated to his family. His ONLY weakness is Kryptonite.

And THIS is why he’s utterly boring.

Perfect characters with no weaknesses aren’t relatable. Conversely, ‘perfect’ villains who are wholly evil—with no redeeming qualities or sympathetic motivations—are caricatures.

Life isn’t black-and-white and neither are people. Good fiction appreciates this reality and understands audiences gravitate to the gray, because that’s where they live.

Black and white, good and bad make for predictable fiction. Audiences LOVE when stories (and characters) surprise them.

When we leave room for a ‘good guy’ to fall from grace, or a ‘bad guy’ to finally do the right thing, it keeps readers vested wondering what will happen next. Adding gray areas is what prevents writing from being ‘formulaic.’

When the audience can’t predict how the characters will act/react, they can’t predict what will happen next in the story, let alone know how it will end.

If you think back to the movies, books and series you’ve loved the most, I promise you’ll see that psychological wiggle room that allowed you to ‘slip into’ the story by forming your own opinions.

If you want to learn how to open that psychological seam, I recommend going back and rereading or rewatching the stories that hooked you the hardest and this time, take notes.

Read/or watch intentionally. Writing is NOT easy and great writing demands practice, study and TRAINING.

I LOVE Hearing From You!

HOW have your favorite stories (books, movies, or television series) hooked you? When? What drew you in?

I know over the past week and a half, while on ‘vacation’ due to major dental work, I’ve discovered some new favorites on Audible. I’ve also gone back to watch older series from the aughts that I only was able to watch in bits and pieces because I was too broke for cable.

I’m watching Criminal Minds and NCIS and I find it so fascinating how much I have fallen in love with the characters. They MAKE the series. NCIS wouldn’t be NCIS without Gibbs, Abby, Ducky, DiNozzo, etc. I have really enjoyed watching them arc as ‘people.’ And, while I’ll never be a federal agent (in large part to age and search history), I can relate to love, friendship, loss, betrayal, grief, and all the in between.

What about y’all? What characters have ‘spoken’ to you the most? Why?

The post Characters: The Emotional Touchstone Readers Crave appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

Characters are critical for stories that resonate. Why? Because characters are the conduit that connects the reader, that vests them in the events.

We can’t empathize with technology, spaceships, magic, or nuclear submarines. Humans can’t bond emotionally to a place (without the characters as the connection).

For instance, we CARE about Lord of the Rings’ Middle Earth because we care about Frodo, Samwise and Gandalf. And, because Frodo, Samwise and Gandalf care deeply for Middle Earth and the Shire…we do as well.

Story is like the wall socket that’s connected a tremendous power source. But, how useful would those wall sockets be if all the gadgets in everyday life didn’t have plugs? How useful would a bunch of dead gadgets be?

We cannot have story without characters and can’t, conversely, have characters (DIMENSIONAL characters) without story.

Readers read stories, but great stories read the readers .

Great Characters are What They DO

One of my mantras in life and in fiction is, ‘Talk is cheap.’ Probably the single largest mistake I see in newbie fiction is the writer insists on telling us a character is this or that instead of showing the character being this or that (then allowing us to be the judge).

Now, I do understand that we cannot write a book that is all showing. We do need some telling lest the book be a half million words long and unreadable. As authors, however, we are wise to hold back a little. Use restraint.

Let the audience do some of the work .

This allows readers to join in the experience, and metaphorically ‘complete the circuit.’

Remember, readers bond to characters via their own baggage and their own worldview. Well-written stories are a different experience for every reader, because we (humans) see the characters through infinitely varied lenses.

Ideally, audiences should see our characters through themselves.

This is how we can have a series like Game of Thrones (or A Song of Ice and Fire if we’re talking about the books) and fans have vastly different opinions about the characters.

Some fans LOVED Daenerys Targaryen. I couldn’t stand her. I actually liked Cersei Lannister, even though plenty of folks hated her.

Suffice to say that, whether it’s Harry Potter, Star Wars, Firefly, Battlestar Galactica, Friends, Marvel, DC, or Big Bang Theory, success can be largely attributed to fan-devotion to favorite characters.

How can characters hold so much power?

If we (the writer) assign moral judgement and TELL an audience this character is good and this one bad and this one a liar and this one a hero, we close that emotional expanse where imagination and empathy lead to bonding.

Half the POWER the characters wield is their baggage, the other half being the READER’S baggage.

We’re wise to leave room in the story for the audience to park their overpacked emotional U-Hauls.

Readers Imbue Emotional Energy

If we can learn to write characters in a way that they act out of their own wants, desires, wounds, blindspots, and shame, then we open the seam between fiction and reality.

Widen this seam enough, and the audience can fall into our story and become part of our world.

Great characters should have baggage, the more the better. They should also be acting out of this baggage. And, if we (Author God) will refrain from assigning any value judgement (telling) the characters will, as a result, become more complex.

Right now maybe you’re all saying, ‘Great, Kristen! Um, huh?’

When WE (the author) assign a value judgement, we are doing this based off OUR experiences, psychological makeups, wounds, etc. This limits how much the reader can participate by forming their own opinions.

If, however, we can practice restraint, the READERS will formulate their own assessments based off their wholly unique and infinitely varied experiences. In fact, that is a HUGE part of the fun.

It’s why we (fans) take The Sorting Hat Quiz over at Pottermore, or Facebook quizzes to tell us which Avenger we are or which character from Firefly we resemble most.

Back to Game of Thrones, though. Why did I ‘like’ Cersei Lannister despite her being a fairly horrible person?

Because of MY background.

‘Noble’ Qualities’

How audiences loved to hate Cersei. Yet, why did she resonate for me? Why did her character strike such a visceral chord? What made her dimensional and real instead of a paper doll/mustache-twirling caricature?

First, she possessed what I BELIEVED to be noble qualities. Cersei LOVED her family (her brother perhaps a bit too much for my comfort, but whatever).

I’ve always been deeply dedicated to family. Also, as a mother, I understood her motivations. She would do anything for her children. She’d stop at nothing to assist, promote, protect or even AVENGE them.

Literally.

She was fiercely devoted to her children (even a child as terrifying as Joffrey) and heaven help anyone who messed with her cubs. She’d melt you with wildfire…then drop a city on you.

For reals. She did it.

*Cersei drops mic then half of Westeros*

As a mom, I fully appreciate how vulnerable our children can make us. How blinded we can be to the faults of our kids.

Also, Cercei’s personality is a lot like mine. I don’t do anything in half-measures and neither did Cersei Lannister.

She Had a Sympathetic Viewpoint

Because of MY background, I felt Cersie possessed a highly sympathetic viewpoint. She was a woman in a man’s world, overlooked even in her own family.

Of all the Lannister children, SHE was the only one who paid attention, and who outpaced her brothers by a million miles regarding Rule with an Iron Fist/On an Iron Throne 101.

SHE was the Lannister most qualified to rule, but instead, her father handed her off like chattel to marry a fat, sloppy, philandering joke of a leader, King Robert Baratheon who openly disrespected her.

And it was that pervasive powerlessness—generated by the world she had no choice being born into—that pissed her off more than a little (and rightfully so).

I understood her frustrations.

Her one brother, Jaime, had more interest in prancing around the country playing ’emotionally wounded knight’ than protecting the realms, and the other brother, Tyrion–in the beginning at least–was a drunken, hard-partying cad who cared only about himself.

Men more ‘qualified’ to rule from the Iron Throne surrounded her—and by ‘more qualified’ I mean they had man parts.

The lion’s share of Cersei’s insane desire to gain the throne for one of her sons could be largely attributed to the fact that she believed she could rule vicariously through her sons who had the requisite ‘man parts.’

She believed that, if she could secure the Iron Throne, she could maintain the security they’d fought so hard and lost so much to win in the wars against The Mad King.

Of course after Season Six she was there to blow $#!& up and was all out of children. She made the High Sparrow into a smoking crater glowing hotter than a Chernobyl Ferris Wheel.

And that ‘Rule by Man Part Mandate’? She melted that, too…

A Character to Act Out MY Feelings

I knew what it felt like to live in a world where a woman wasn’t supposed to ‘outdo’ the men. I’ve been lectured plenty of times about ‘not knowing my place.’

Male family members constantly insinuated I couldn’t understand business even though I’d earned a degree in International Economics.

When I took the ASVAB for the Air Force, I scored 100% in mechanics and aced anything math-related. I’d just completed Honors Physics, because I had a strong interest in engineering.

Alas, the recruiters laughed when I asked about avionics because, ‘Didn’t I want to be a nurse?’

*sighs*

I spent most of my life in trouble with someone because I didn’t act a certain way. Like Cersei, I didn’t fit in, didn’t say the right things, act the right way, or have the right interests.

I didn’t understand WHY I was supposed to let ‘the men be in charge’ even when ‘the men’ weren’t competent.

That cost me a job…or four.

Characters: Mirror, Mirror on the Page

Great characters will act as a mirror for readers via the story problem(s) and how the characters interact with/respond to the world around them.

All stories are human stories, whether in space or in a magical realm. Characters (should) endure the same trauma and challenges that audiences do in life. This mirroring gives us (readers) a safe place to feel and process our emotions.

Going back to Cersei Lannister.

Cersei mirrored a lot of the frustrations I’d faced throughout my life, and this created a kinship that made me love her and forgive her even though she was utterly horrible.

I KNEW what it was like to be the best qualified person for the job, yet not even considered. I understood how frustrating it was to not be able to simply ASK for what I wanted or needed, to have to hint, suggest and ‘wheedle’ so I didn’t step on toes.

Manipulation is the tool/lever/weapon of those too weak to simply ask for/go after what they want.

I’m a very blunt person.

*shock face*

I know.

What you see is what you get. I suck at taking hints, so I don’t like hinting to others. If you need something? Ask. I’m aging here, and I don’t like wasting time guessing.

If I hurt your feelings? Tell me so I can apologize and make sure not to tromp on you again.

I despise manipulation. Yet, there was a time I had to learn how to ‘suggest’ and ‘hint’ if I wanted to get anything accomplished.

On top of all this? Like Cersie, I, too, have endured terrible consequences due to incompetent leadership, and been powerless to do anything about it for ONE REASON.

I was a female.

Characters & The Audience

This said, plenty of people loathed Cersie from the get-go.

Just as I hated Robert Baratheon from the onset, because he reminded me of people who’ve caused me tremendous pain, Cersei Lannister could remind someone else of some tormentor in their life.

OR, it could be they didn’t share much in common.

THEIR life experiences, baggage, wounds, personalities made them bond to a different character that told ‘their story’ instead.

The skilled writer understands human narcissism. We are a self-absorbed bunch.

That’s why we long for stories where we can see a bit of ourselves reflected back. This is the danger with creating one-dimensional characters.

Newer writers, not yet skilled in the art of mischief and mayhem, tend to gravitate to the extremes. We have super-perfect characters pitted against utterly horrible villains.

Unfortunately, black-and-white is boring and predictable.

Superman Syndrome

Superman, in my POV, is a Mary Sue. He has all these superpowers—strength, speed, he can fly, possesses x-ray vision, etc. Superman is also handsome, noble, kind, wholesome, and dedicated to his family. His ONLY weakness is Kryptonite.

And THIS is why he’s utterly boring.

Perfect characters with no weaknesses aren’t relatable. Conversely, ‘perfect’ villains who are wholly evil—with no redeeming qualities or sympathetic motivations—are caricatures.

Life isn’t black-and-white and neither are people. Good fiction appreciates this reality and understands audiences gravitate to the gray, because that’s where they live.

Black and white, good and bad make for predictable fiction. Audiences LOVE when stories (and characters) surprise them.

When we leave room for a ‘good guy’ to fall from grace, or a ‘bad guy’ to finally do the right thing, it keeps readers vested wondering what will happen next. Adding gray areas is what prevents writing from being ‘formulaic.’

When the audience can’t predict how the characters will act/react, they can’t predict what will happen next in the story, let alone know how it will end.

If you think back to the movies, books and series you’ve loved the most, I promise you’ll see that psychological wiggle room that allowed you to ‘slip into’ the story by forming your own opinions.

If you want to learn how to open that psychological seam, I recommend going back and rereading or rewatching the stories that hooked you the hardest and this time, take notes.

HOW did the writer(s) hook you? When? What drew you in? Read/or watch intentionally. Writing is NOT easy and great writing demands practice, study and TRAINING.

This is why I’m always creating and offering new classes!

And remember, a FREE recording comes with purchase in case you can’t make the live class and also so you can rewatch and study.

In fact, for characters, we have COMPLETELY NEW CLASS COMING UP!

First…

The Art of Character: Writing Characters for a SERIES

OCTOBER 1st! THIS COMING TUESDAY!

How do we create characters that readers will fall in love with, characters strong enough to go the distance? Find out in this THREE-HOUR class that also comes with detailed notes and a character-building template. Use Binge10 for $10 off.

This class dovetails with my previous class, Bring on the Binge: How to Plot and Write a Series (NowON DEMAND). Use Binge10 for $10 off.

Need some help with platform and branding?

Spilling the TEA: Blogging for Authors

THIS MONDAY, September 30th. Blogging is a powerful way to build an author brand and also make a great income doing what we love…writing. Use Tea10 for $10 off.

Branding: WHEN YOUR NAME ALONE Can Sell (ON DEMAND)

Use brand10 for $10 off.

Come join all the nerdy fun! See y’all in class!

The post Characters: Audiences Read Stories, but Great Stories Read the Audience appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

Inner demons can be one of the toughest concepts for new (and even not-so-new) authors to grasp. Yet, inner demons are essential to create a riveting story that connects with the audience.

Frankly, characters with no blindspots or baggage are B-O-R-I-N-G.

Bad decisions make great stories.

We humans tend to resent perfect people and, instead, connect more intimately and authentically via shared flaws. Audiences love rooting for their favorite character to overcome his weaknesses and come out the other side better and stronger than when the adventure began.

It’s like when they win, we win.

Without this internal angst, a story falls flat and characters become forgettable, interchangeable plot puppets.

In all my years working with writers, one of the greatest weakness I’ve witnessed is that new writers mistake melodrama (soap opera drama) for story drama.

Yes, this really is related to inner demons.

Melodrama works well for soap operas, but spells death for a novel.

Soap operas don’t require a solid core story problem with definitive structure…just great hair, fabulous makeup, and a cast with more issues than every Dr. Phil guest combined (and little or no interest in getting rid of those issues).

In soaps, it is perfectly acceptable to point out personal demons with neon lights.

Why? Because while problems are constantly being talked about (via fights, gossip, confessions)…nothing is ever fully resolved.

Ever.

And I am in no way dissing soap operas. There’s a good reason they’ve lasted as long as they have. Come on, Days of Our Lives has been around since 1965.

Yet, this type of storytelling is designed to hook in a very superficial way. Also, what audiences will tolerate in a television show will drive them bonkers in a book.

STOP TELLING ME THINGS I ALREADY KNOW!

NOTHING IS HAPPENING!

*primal screams*

In soaps, the characters have personal demons, but not really INNER demons. If the demons are obscured (as is necessary in a novel) then audiences couldn’t miss two…ten years of episodes and yet still be able to catch up in a week.

This is why there’s a lot of ‘As you know, Bob’ dialogue. The repetition is there to help anyone who’s missed some episodes to get back on track with the show.

Soap Opera writing is designed to be overt.

Storylines are crafted to keep going on and on with only enough ‘closure’ to introduce a new hook (evil twin, amnesia, insider trading, hostile takeover, murder, infidelity….*looks to drop-down menu*).

Novels, on the other hand, don’t have the luxury of rambling on for decades. Unlike soap operas, novels have to actually end.

***Wow, the things I learned with my first novel.

This means we (the author) must introduce a core problem (early) that we’ll resolve—fully or at least satisfactorily—by the final page.

Sudsy Demons

Why am I bothering to talk about soap operas? Because I see A LOT of soap opera writing in new manuscripts, and I want y’all to understand why this style works on screen but not in novels.

In soap operas, it’s perfectly acceptable for a character to wax rhapsodic about his or her personal demons in cheesy monologues.

It has to do with the medium.

Soap operas got the name ‘soap operas’ because the stories were originally created for housewives to listen to when doing the wash or cleaning.

Initially, these stories played on the radio, but the storytelling style didn’t change much even when soaps shifted to television.

Writers scripted stories and dialogue in such a way that the audience didn’t have to be LOOKING at the screen to keep up (which is why you’ll notice there are a lot of characters calling one another by name which—in life and in a novel—is plain weird).

‘As you know, Anastasia, the reason Fabio and I had to run away to Cabo is because Dr. Fandango has been hiding the fact that Fabio has multiple personalities. And yes, I confess. I helped Fabio escape Dr. Fandango’s facility. Why? Because Dr. Fandango refuses to admit he’s my biological father. I know abandonment, Anastasia. And I want Dr. Fandango to know it, too….’

*dramatic music here*

As a Texan? I LOVE me some Telemundo. Telenovelas are da BOMB! Everything is over the top, and even though my Spanish skills are rudimentary at best, I can become easily addicted in ONE episode…

Unless We’re Writing Episodes of As the World Turns…

We’ll need to deliver those personal demons with a little—okay a LOT—more finesse. We can’t be as blatant or the story will be…um, weird.

This means we must have a solid plot because the problem with inner demons is they are, well…inner. The author’s job then, is to draw the demons out (via a STORY PROBLEM) so they can be overcome.

Plot and structure is how we do that.

Did I Mention Inner Demons are INNER?

Many new writers begin their ‘novel’ with a character doing a lot of internalization and thinking and thinking and more thinking and pondering over personal issues.

That, or the MC is fully self-actualized and well aware of his/her ‘issues’ and talks about them…a lot.

This is problematic for a number of reasons.

First, the entire POINT of the story problem is to shove the MC out of their comfort zone and into a place where he or she has no choice but to face the inner demons or LOSE BIG.

When we begin a story with an MC who’s already fully aware of his shortcomings, this character will quickly grow tedious and ring false. This is also a formula for a character readers will HATE.

How many of you LOVE people who KNOW they have a problem, but still do dumb crap anyway?

What, no takers? Thought so.

Secondly, revealing inner demons too early—and spelling them out in Crayon—spoils the mystery/adventure. Part of what readers love about a good story is that, like a therapist, we see what the MC’s issues are long before they do.

The main reason we turn pages until three in the morning is we want to find out if the MC figures out their problem before it’s too late.

Thirdly? When we introduce the story with inner demons—our MC droning on about emotional damage—it is too SOON. We (readers) just don’t care.

Nothing personal, but we have our own problems. We don’t have the time or energy to give a fig about a stranger’s drama.

The story problem is what hooks us and makes us care. So about these inner demons, remember…

Demons Hide in the Blind Spot

One key thing to remember about inner demons is they hide really, really well. If they didn’t, then shrinks would starve and be treated like writers. 

Wow, you’re a psychotherapist? Really? What’s your ‘real’ job? Seriously, people PAY you to listen to their problems? 

This is another reason we don’t begin with a protagonist thinking about her inner demons. Odds are, she is oblivious they are even there. She isn’t yet that self-actualized.

Denial is more than a river in Africa.

In fact, the stronger the denial, the better the story (or, if you’re a therapist, the better the $$$$$). This is why your protagonist, if pitted against the antagonist in Act One, should lose. He/She has not grown enough in order to defeat the core story problem

Plot is What Exorcises the Demons

The plot is the crucible that will fire this demon to the surface so the character can then defeat it. This is why understanding plotting becomes so vital. A great plot problem is going to sprout directly from that inner demon. Why?

Because fiction is the path of greatest resistance.

What good is a plot problem unless it pits the character against her deepest flaw?

Some weaknesses might be fairly obvious—grief, betrayal or addiction. The problem, however, is no one wants to read 300+ pages of someone whining about a loss or a compulsion. We would probably want to smother such a person to get her to shut up.

Whining is not a plot.

Also remember that there is a reason for the grief, feeling of betrayal or addiction, and THAT is the real inner demon that must show its head.

There has to be an outside challenge that forces the character to eventually choose to remain the same or to evolve (Act III).

You gonna keep hiding in a bottle? Or are you gonna face/defeat WHY you drink so you can walk your daughter down the aisle?

Not all inner demons are as obvious, though. In fact, the tricky demons can look a hell of a lot like our greatest strengths.

Remember that every character strength has a corresponding weakness.

***For a SUPER efficient way to find interesting blind spots, check out Angela Ackerman and Becca Puglisi’s AMAZING Positive Trait Thesaurus. There’s also the Negative Trait Thesaurus. I recommend you just treat yourself and buy the entire collection. You’ll thank me later.

Anyway, inner demons can be a real bugger to spot because these ‘strengths’ have served the character really well (or at least the character believes they have).

In fact, these inner demons might be the very reason the character has always been successful…until you (Evil Author Overlord) hand her a problem where the old tools no longer work.

New level, new devil, baby .

Willingness to work eighty hours a week is fabulous for climbing the corporate ladder, but what about keeping a marriage together?

Hmmmm….

Positives Can Be Negatives

Let’s say our imaginary protagonist has a heart of gold. We’ll call her Helpful Hanna for today’s purposes.

HH is always there to help a friend, lend an ear, or fix a problem no matter what. Helping is the core of her identity.

But what happens when, one day, she has the chance to pursue her dream?

She decides to open her own cupcake bakery (but over time) will come to realize that she’s spending so much time helping other people that her bakery’s doors might never open.

If she’s rescuing others at all hours and no matter the inconvenience, how long until she crumbles under the pressure?

Before her cupcake bakery dream, she had the luxury of bending more than the karma sutra to lend a hand.

The plot, however, forces her to finally see that others are actually using her. She might even realize that she wasn’t helping after all…that she was really enabling or even controlling.

Maybe those around her never expected her to constantly help and would actually love a chance to give back to her for a change.

*mind blown*

Hannah must eventually choose.

Eventually, the story should force Hannah to a crossroad—either she can do all the things for all the people, or she can have her dream.

But she cannot have both.

The pressure is what makes Helpful Hanna acknowledge her inner demon and face what’s really driving her compulsive need to help.

Perhaps Hannah’s ‘helping’ is more about power, control, or being ‘needed.’ Could be a lot of things.

When the outside challenge—opening a cupcake bakery—reveals the cracks in Hannah’s core identity, what will she DO?

We answer this question in Act Three.

See, before Hannah had a dream of a cupcake bakery, she could be there for everyone, anytime and all the time.

The plot problem (in the form of a dream), however, drives the demon to the surface and our MC has to learn or lose.

Notice how the problem (outside goal) helps this become a story, not just 300 pages of tedious navel-gazing. We show Hannah has a problem, then show her realizing she has a problem, and then show her overcoming that problem.

Flawed People Make Fabulous Fiction

In the end, remember that inner demons make a better story. And not every book requires some huge, over-the-top trauma.

My entire planet was wiped out, and I am the last of my kind.

Yeah…ok. I got head lice in third grade. Was super embarrassing.

In fact, those ‘smaller’ demons—sibling rivalry, abandonment, false shame, false guilt, family expectations—can be far more resonant because the audience can relate.

What are your thoughts? I LOVE hearing from you!

Did you struggle with soap opera drama early on in your writing? I know I did. Hey, there is a LEARNING curve to this.

Have you ever been hooked on a soap opera? Which one?

In college, I made fun of my roommate for watching Days of Our Lives and would pick on her during the show. A week later? I was changing my class schedule so I could find out if Bo and Hope were EVER going to get back together.

*hangs head in shame*

Do you feel a little better about plot? Does it make it simpler to see that the ‘inner demons’ don’t have to be huge to be HUGE?

Heck, I still need therapy for the dumb stuff adults said to me when I was a kid.

Too bad you aren’t as pretty as Such-And-Such.

Or as an adult.

You’re a writer? How cute. Well, your cousin—the one who married the astronaut—just gave up fashion modeling to cure cancer. Isn’t that fantastic?

*screams*

Surely I am not the ONLY one from a jacked up family. Feel free to share!

…really.

Anyway…

Just FYI, I’m extending the CLEARANCE sale a little longer, until new classes begin. We need to test the new Event Espresso license and this site’s functionality (we’ve updated everything). If you need a good plotting or character class, NOW is the time to get it.

I have to free up space on our servers. All my classes are detailed and average 2-3 hours. These are On Demand classes you can watch at your leisure and have fun while you learn (for classes, scroll down).

This not only is to help you guys get the training you need (affordable summer school), but it will open up room for the new recordings of new classes.

Please take advantage of the sale! I rarely drop prices this low.

After July 17th, these classes will no longer be for sale (and will be slated for deletion).

Some, I will offer again later in the year. Others? I won’t be offering again the same way (will be likely splitting them into two classes because they ran long).

Thanks so much for your support!

ON DEMAND CLEARANCE ON BRANDING & CRAFT CLASSES!

Available until July 17th, 2019

CLEARANCE Branding, Social Media & Sales Classes

ON DEMAND T.K.O. BUNDLE: Branding, Blogging & Sales for Authors

$99 (Regularly $165)

ON DEMAND Brand Boss: Branding for Authors

$35 (Regularly $55)

ON DEMAND Sales for Writers: Sell Books Not Your SOUL

$35 (Regularly $55)

ON DEMAND Blogging for Authors

$35 (Regularly $55)

Also Offering:

ON DEMAND Social Schizophrenia: Building a Brand WITHOUT Losing Your Mind

$35 (Regularly $55)

CLEARANCE Craft Classes

Plot Boss: Writing Books Readers Want to BUY!

$35 (Regularly $55)

Fiction Addiction: The ‘Secret’ Ingredient Readers Crave

$35 (Regularly $55)

Story Master: From Dream to DONE

$35 (Regularly $55)

The Art of Character: Creating Dimensional ‘People’ in Fiction

$35 (Regularly $55)

Beyond Bulletproof Barbie: Creating Strong Female Characters for a Modern World

$35 (Regularly $55)

The post Inner Demons: Soap Opera Drama vs. Story Drama appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

So I contacted Kristen awhile back and asked her if I could hijack her blog and she graciously said Yes. Because of this lapse in judgment outpouring of generosity, I’m going to try and forget that sarcasm is my love language and, instead, be professional. I’ve just launched a book and am feeling absolutely giddy with freedom, so this is easier said than done. But we’ll give it a go.

I’ve been thinking lately about something that Angela and I touch on in all of our books: The Mirror of Real Life. It’s this idea that something in our stories is like a mirror for readers that reflects back to them something of themselves. When we portray the character as this mirror, it draws readers in and encourages empathy because they recognize a commonality with the character.

In today’s world, where there are roughly a gajillion books your readers could be buying, it’s super important to pull readers into YOUR story. You want them staying up way too late finishing your books, thinking about them after they’re done and running to the computer to see when the next in the series is coming out. While there are a number of ways to encourage this fascination, one of the strongest methods is by writing characters that resonate with readers on a personal level. So I want to talk today about common elements that, when applied to our characters, increase our chances of engaging readers.

Fears

I’m not talking about surface phobias like Brussels sprouts and spiders (though, please, both are icky). I’m talking about deep-seated, debilitating, life-altering fears: rejection, failure, betrayal, physical harm, the death of a loved one. These fears are so great that they become drivers for our behavior, leading us to do and not do things that we believe will keep these painful events from happening. Inflicting these on our characters is cruel and probably makes us as authors horrible people, but they do serve a solid storytelling purpose: they tap into common experiences that readers understand. When readers see the character struggling with a familiar fear, a connection is forged, and empathy is born.

Traits

There are many contributors to the formation of a character’s positive and negative traits. Fears can be a factor: Mom is proactive, observant, overprotective, or paranoid because she’s afraid something will happen to her kids; Joe worries about rejection, so he tends to be withdrawn, abrasive, or cautious. Upbringing can be instrumental, along with the caregivers who raised the character, positive experiences and successes they’ve had, their ethics and values—even genetics can play a part.

Regardless of their origin, when a character’s dominant traits mirror those of the reader or people in the reader’s life, the character becomes more interesting. Traits like stubbornness, optimism, fairness, and impulsivity act as tags that say, “Hey! This guy’s just like you, or Grandma, or that jerk kid who lived down the road who used to shoot you with his BB gun.” Giving your character flaws and attributes that are common to the human experience can be the most straightforward way to bridge the gap between readers and your cast.

Human Needs

This one takes us back to Psychology 101 (which is farther back for some of us than others) and good ol’ Uncle Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. The premise of his theory is that there are five basic categories of needs that all people must have in order to be wholly realized. When one of these is missing, we become compelled to fill that void, and we do this through adopting new habits, thought patterns, and beliefs that align with that purpose. These needs are universal, meaning that even on a subconscious level, we all share them. So, for example, when readers see a character whose safety and security has been compromised, they understand what that’s like and why it’s so important for the character to get it back. Boom! Connection.

Story Goals

And how does the character regain that missing need in their life? Through an overall goal. To paraphrase Michael Hauge in Writing Screenplays That Sell, every plausible story idea can be explained with a simple formula:

It’s a story about A (the protagonist) who wants B (the story goal) because Y (the missing need that will be filled through the accomplishment of that goal).

Getting the girl, escaping an alien invasion, winning the court case, avenging oneself—we see the same goals repeated from one story to another because they’re tried and true ways that missing needs can be met. Why does he need to get the girl? Because he’s missing love and belonging. Why does she want to win the court case? Because it will provide the esteem she’s been lacking for so long.

Story goals resonate with readers on two levels. First, they’re goals the reader personally has pursued or have seen others pursue. Secondly, they recognize, often subconsciously, that achieving that goal will fill the need; they know that getting B is vital to the character’s happiness and success, and they want the character to win. Give your character an overall goal that not only makes sense for the story but also meets that internal need, and you’ll increase the chances that your reader will relate to the character.

Self-Growth

We may not verbalize it often, but we all are on a journey in this life to improve ourselves. We don’t want to be the same people ten years from now that we were yesterday, and we all hope to leave the world a better place than it was when we found it. When readers see characters on this journey of discovery and self-growth, they get it. They’ve been there. And they want the character to succeed because if the character can do it, then there’s hope for them too.

Emotional Wounds

I saved this one for last because, when it comes to mirroring real life, nothing has the impact of an emotional wound. We’ve all experienced terrible things in our lives—singular events or repeated situations that were so emotionally and/or physically painful that we don’t want to ever go through them again. Readers can relate to those experiences and their devastating effects. As a matter of fact, when you take the effort to explore your character’s backstory and unearth this formative event, it enables you to incorporate all of the aforementioned elements, resulting in a character that reads as true-to-life and utterly relateable. In a nutshell, here’s how it works:

Something awful happens to your character (emotional wound). They become afraid that it or something similar to it will happen again (fear). So they adopt emotional shielding to keep them safe in the form of new characteristics (traits), behaviors, and false beliefs about themselves or the world. But instead of protecting them, this shielding ends up creating other problems, such as keeping others at a distance or limiting their ability to successfully do what they love (human need). To fill the void, they either knowingly or unknowingly set out to accomplish something (story goal) that they believe will meet that need. But they’re unable to succeed because the wound is hobbling them, holding them back. It’s not until the character is able to face that wounding event and come to grips with it (self-growth) that they can distance themselves from the past and move forward into the future.

Basically, the wound is the Alpha and Omega of reader-character relatability. It supplies the starting, middle, and end points for a story structure and character arc that will offer many opportunities for readers to see themselves in the protagonist and the story. And once readers care about your character, they’re going to want to keep reading to see if he or she overcomes.

If this process seems oversimplified, it’s because there’s only so much information that can be crammed into a 1400-word blog post. For more information, the topic can be explored to its fullest, most in-depth, most ad-nauseum-est extent in our latest book: The Emotional Wound Thesaurus: A Writer’s Guide to Psychological Trauma.

BIO:

Becca Puglisi is an international speaker, writing coach, and bestselling author of The Emotion Thesaurus and its sequels, including the latest member of the family: The Emotional Wound Thesaurus. Her books are available in five languages, are sourced by US universities, and are used by novelists, screenwriters, editors, and psychologists around the world. She is passionate about learning and sharing her knowledge with others through her Writers Helping Writers blog and via One Stop For Writers—a powerhouse online library created to help writers elevate their storytelling. You can find Becca online at both of these spots, as well as on Facebook and Twitter.

The post Writing Characters That Mirror Real Life appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

It’s me, Cait Reynolds, and I’m going to be brutal here. You’ve been warned. But, honestly, I get a little stabby when I encounter a Mary Sue in a book. Mary Sues are death to fiction, yet they’re more common than head lice in Kindergarten (and about as desirable). For the sake of time today, we will focus on the most common Mary Sue peeve…the Mary Sue Shopping Spree.

What is a Mary Sue Shopping Spree?

It’s wish fulfillment at its worst.

First of all, for anyone who is unfamiliar with the term “Mary Sue,” the best definition is here at Urban Dictionary. But, for our shorthand use, a Mary Sue is an impossibly perfect character.

She’s beautiful (flaming red hair and emerald eyes, for example) and smart (better grades than Hermione Granger but never seems to be in the library). A Mary Sue falls in love with the hero/hero falls in love with her early, often and easily.

What IS a “Mary Sue”?

There are all kinds of Mary Sue’s–no genre is safe. Here’s just a sample:

• Victim Sue! with an impossible streak of bad luck/tragedy/knack for getting kidnapped and/or stalked.
• Warrior Sue! who has a mouth like a sailor, throws a mean punch, fights like Lara Croft and Bruce Lee’s love child (and probably has a lineage about as weird), and still looks amazing in a ball gown (but doesn’t want to be taken for a sissy girl!).
• Magic Sue! with similarities to Warrior Sue in that she has unheard of powers that usually get her into trouble (see Victim Sue) until she learns to control them, and then with a wave of her (slender, delicate) hand, saves the day without chipping a nail.
• Misfit Sue who is the proverbial ugly duckling, except all she needs really is some good conditioner, a fairy godmother, and a gift certificate to Forever21 in order to turn into the hottie that suddenly attracts all the guys.

There are so many issues with Mary Sues, but the single largest Mary Sue staple is—GROANS—the shopping spree.

This is the point in a story where everything grinds to a halt so the heroine can get ready for the ball/date/wedding/party/sacred mage ceremony, etc.

You know the kind of scene I’m talking about…but in case you don’t, let’s look at an example.

Mary Sue Goes to the Ball

Let’s use my favorite Mary Sue stand-in Seraphina to illustrate. Seraphina has had a hard life as a disinherited princess living in hiding in a faux medieval village and secretly training to use her immense magical powers to take back the throne and rid the land of evil.

She finds a way to infiltrate the castle by sneaking into a fancy ball that the king is giving. But, in order to blend in with the crowd, she will need…a ballgown.

What comes next is any combination of the following descriptions:

• Shopping or gathering all the necessary clothing
• Hairstyles
• Dresses
• Jewelry, and other accessories
• Makeup (!)

But…it’s not just descriptions. We, the readers, are subjected to descriptions in excruciating detail.

Also, every character involved in the scene is kind, excited, happy to help with the preparations, and relentlessly cheery. Apparently, there can be no conflict in the dressing room (unless it’s Seraphina objecting to the ‘girly pink’ or ‘frilly’ dress, thereby making a statement of profound strength of character and independence).

We read about sweetheart necklines, bias cuts, skirts that gently flare out, lace gloves, sleeves that come to just above the wrist, silver embroidery patterns of magical runes (or flowers, whatever).

Gritting our teeth, we skim over the part about hair that is piled high with loose curls falling softly around her face, or braids intricately woven with pearls and jeweled flower pins with just a few errant and untamable curls falling softly around her face.

The author beats us over the head with the fact that she only wears a little bit of eyeshadow and lip gloss (WTH? Do they even have lip gloss in faux medieval realms?) because she doesn’t really need any makeup to enhance her natural beauty.

That strangling noise?

It’s us. The readers. Being garroted….

With the heroine’s delicate chain complete with cheesy symbolic pendant (dragon, rose, snake, rune, whatever) because that’s not a dead giveaway to the bad guy(s).

Hey, doesn’t that girl with the opal-eyed dragon pendant that looks like the one that belonged to Queen Margitte look a lot like dead Queen Margitte?.

Also, a general rule of style is to match the formality of jewelry to the formality of the outfit. One doesn’t wear parure with buckskin breeches, and conversely, charm necklaces are not to be worn with ballgowns. (Yes, I just channeled my inner Tim Gunn.)

Let’s not forget how Seraphina chooses sensible low-heeled slippers as opposed to the…um…lucite platform heels offered by the empty-headed ninnies who only care about boys and clothes.

Because taking time out from pace, tension, plot, and relevance to talk about dressing a character totally doesn’t paint the author as having the emotional range of a fifteen-year-old. 

All joking aside, let’s look a little closer at WHY the Mary Sue Shopping Spree is so problematic.

Go Ahead. Sue Me!

It’s not really Seraphina’s fault that the author wants to play out a Cinderella fantasy. Unfortunately, this violates one of KLamb’s most basic rules: NEVER MAKE IT EASY FOR THE CHARACTERS!

Nobody wants to read about everybody being happy, getting along, and things going their way. Can you say, “Snooze-Fest?”

Can you imagine Harry Potter if he’d grown up with his parents alive, been BFFs with Draco Malfoy, and figured out how to vanquish Voldemort without leaving the comfort of Hogwarts?

No, you can’t because no reader would have made it past page TEN. Harry Potter would have been another forgettable character in yet another bad book.

But he isn’t. Why? Harry Potter is legendary because of CONFLICT and seemingly insurmountable odds. Not everything slipping in place as if his life is coated in Teflon.

The same goes for the Cinderella moment. Let’s look at why.

Slumber Party or Plot Point? 

Getting-ready-for-the-party scenes must obey the rules of fiction just like all the other scenes. Where is the conflict that drives the story? What is the relevance of the getting-ready-for-the-ball scene? Is there any character growth? Are there any obstacles?

If the answer is no, then we need to think twice about putting in a scene like this.

Hemming and Hawing 

Set aside the sins of over-descriptiveness for a moment. Instead, look at the science of how we read and process the written word. In general, we read at about 200-400 words per minute (cool, non? Read this for more!).

That means that careful description is critical to the FLOW of a reader’s understanding and visualization. If we STALL the flow by making a reader stop and try to visualize EXACTLY what a character is wearing (I’m looking at you, hem lengths and embroidered bodices!), we risk losing the reader’s immersion in our world.

Anachronism Alert!

The Mary Sue Shopping Spree also showcases when an author hasn’t bothered to do his or her homework with either historical research or fantasy world-building (LIP GLOSS???). With historical, this is easily solved with just a modicum of research–and luckily for you, I’m obsessed with historical fashion.

Check me out on Pinterest for a decade-by-decade breakdown of fashion across the centuries (and a WHOLE lot more!).

With fantasy, there’s still no excuse for not considering things like climate, culture, how easy it is to get your hands on expensive clothing, etc. Thinking it through isn’t hard. We just have to do it.

Get Seraphina a Personal Shopper and Move on

All of this isn’t to say that we can’t have a makeover scene now and then. There’s just a better way to do it. Here’s how.

Relevance

Makeover scenes must be relevant to the plot and/or character. For example in my book Downcast, I use a literal shopping spree to reveal Stephanie’s growth as a character, in beginning to make her own choices and tap into her own confidence.

More than that, though, Stephanie’s shopping spree sets up a MAJOR conflict.

In fact, it’s one of the biggest pivot points in the whole plot. Could I have used another ploy to get me there? Sure. But, a teenage girl going to the mall for her 18th birthday is both plausible and appropriate for the context (and the YA genre).

If we’re going to use the shopping spree–be it contemporary, ye olde, or beware hippogriffs! style–always ask three things:

• Is it relevant? Does it move the plot forward?
• Will it offer any new clues/information or set the characters up for conflict?
• Does it reveal and/or conceal anything important about the characters (from each other, the reader, etc.)?

If we can answer yes to all three, then we move to the next step, which is…

Bippity-Boppity BORING!

Fairy godmothers way overrated. Why not have the wicked step-sister be the one to have to help get Cinderella ready for the ball? Will the Wal-Mart generic brand wand be up to the challenge of whipping up a ballgown?

Is there a crack in one of the glass slippers? Does the color blue make her look jaundiced? Is anyone willing to tell her that?

What if she really, really wants to wear blue, but the only color the Wal-Mart wand can produce is pink? She has to wear the pink dress. If you transform a pumpkin into a carriage, does it smell like pumpkin on the inside? Is that a good thing? Are the mice unionized?

You get the idea.

The point is the getting-ready-for-the-ball scene should be FULL of delicious difficulties and confectionary conflict. Remember KLamb’s rule: MAKE IT WORSE UNTIL YOU MAKE IT WEIRD. NOTHING COMES EASILY…EVER!

If everyone is happy and excited to help Seraphina get ready for the ball…meh.

What’s the point?

What makes me (reader) want to turn the page? But, if Lady Jordan slips itching powder down Seraphina’s chemise, or the fairy godmother makes an unthinking remark about how to fix the way Seraphina looks a bit puffy…well, NOW we have something to work with!

Give Up Control

The reader will never, ever, ever be able to picture a gown exactly the way we see it in our mind’s eye. Ever. You can tell me all you want about length and fabric and cut and jewelry. However, it’ll either be too much detail, and I’ll lose track of all of the bits I’m supposed to remember, OR, I will just skim and skip until the plot resumes.

Seriously, we need to give up the idea that our descriptions will ever create an exact picture for the reader. Descriptions are meant to be evocative. They also…yeah, you know what I’m going to say here…wait for it…have to be RELEVANT.

And, yes, here’s another handy checklist to work through to determine if a description is relevant:

• Is there something unique, interesting, or important about the dress, jewelry, etc.?
• What is truly different about these clothes for the character and her life experience?
• Are there smells, textures, or sounds (like bracelets clinking) that are unusually pleasurable or uncomfortable?

For example, for a fantasy genre scene, I might describe Seraphina’s reaction to her ball gown like this:

Her first instinct was to decline the gown. The fine silk and rare lapis-dyed color screamed the kind of wealth she had barely ever encountered, let alone would feel comfortable impersonating. She didn’t dare touch it, afraid that the calluses on her fingers would catch and snag the delicate fabric.

Still, she drew closer, fascinated by the  pattern of dragons in mid-flight picked out in silver thread around the hem. When Lady Jordan gave the skirts an expert–if impatient–flick to smooth the creases, the embroidered dragons looked as if they were truly in flight.

A brisk ‘tsk’ from Lady Jordan jolted Seraphina from the daze of admiration, and she shrank from the disapproving moue on the older woman’s lips.

I would probably also make the dragons mean something or be symbolic in some way, though I might not have Lady Jordan inform Seraphina of that because…well, she doesn’t really like the girl or want to help her, and if she must dress a sow’s ear in a silk purse, then at least she will get some entertainment out of it later when the girl stumbles over the etiquette of the significance of the embroidery.

Because being mean to my characters is what makes it fun for my readers.

And, it has nothing to do with being a sociopath. AT ALL.

Next up…Getting Stabby About the Taylors and Shifters

If you’ve read any of my blog posts here, you know that Taylor is Seraphina’s male counterpart. And, Taylor can often be found in romance novels–especially shifter romances. If you think I’m prickly (and hilarious–admit it, you giggled at this post!) about Mary Sue shopping sprees, just watch me rip into shifters…and how to make them better.

You can even watch me do it LIVE this Friday!

Instructor: Cait Reynolds

Price: $45.00 USD

Where: W.A.N.A. Digital Classroom

Date: Friday, November 3, 2017. 7:00-9:00 p.m. EST

Shifter romance is one of the hottest genres in publishing right now. It’s easy, right? You just take a hot guy and have him morph into a wolf…or bear…or…panther…or…

Well, you and the thousands of other shifter romance writers. So, how are readers going to tell your lusty wolf boys apart from another author’s lusty wolf boys? Sure, you can invent clan/pack rules and give your shifters certain features or restrictions.

But, if you want to create unforgettable shifters that will have readers coming back for more, you need to shift your world-building into high gear. (See what I did there with the play on words with ‘shift’? Ha! I’m so funny.)

This class will help you create richer shifter ‘cultures’ by showing you how to:

• Construct the history of your shifters, and by history, I mean real history
• Use science (even if you’re not a science person) to add delicious bits of plausibility to your shifters
• Catch world-building details that create giant gaps in logic that can distract the reader from your story
• Develop stronger characters by giving them a richer, fuller historical, scientific, and world-building context
• Drive action and plot twists in unexpected ways using expanded shifter world-building
• Amp up the romantic and sexual tension using the history and science of your shifters

We are now offering ADVANCED LEVELS for this class. Extra help from an EXPERT.

In a world of a gazillion forgettable shifters, let Cait help you take your shifter to a WHOLE NEW LEVEL.

Shifter GOLD

You get the class (recording included in price) with Cait plus one hour of personalized one-on-one consulting regarding YOUR story. 

Shifter PLATINUM

You get the class (recording included in price) with Cait plus two hours of personalized one-on-one consulting regarding YOUR story and bonus worksheets. These worksheets will efficiently guide you through in-depth world-building and research, providing you with consistency for your writing and an excellent reference/style sheet for your editor and proofreader.

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

Other upcoming WANA classes!

[abcf-grid-gallery-custom-links id=”22231″]

The post Stories That Make Us Stabby: Mary Sue & Why Readers Hate Her appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

Oh, and it looks like we’re in Medieval England…again…

I’m Kim Alexander back to talk about fantasy world-building. This time I’m looking at those writers who make every heroine in their stories a—wait for it—princess.

This is different from Chosen One Syndrome, because when it comes down to it, every protagonist is a chosen one; you’ve chosen to write about them. In this installment, I’ll be talking about working for a living. (More about Chosen One Syndrome in an upcoming blog post!)

When we create fantasy lands like, oh, “Gondfloria” (pop. 2 mill. unicorns), it’s easy to use the default: faux medieval Europe. If we have a bunch of forbidding, craggy, windswept mountains with impenetrable fortresses (I always feel like it should be ‘fortressi’ even though I know better) atop them, the next thing we’re gonna do is make our main character a princess. (Or a prince, I don’t know your life.)

I’m here to suggest to be brave and try something else. I’m not saying we have to make our enchanted land of Gondfloria into an Arctic survivalist encampment. But, we need to think a little bit outside the box…okay, dungeon, especially if the dungeon is full of Northern European royalty.

(Full disclosure: the main character of my novel, The Sand Prince, is – as the title suggests – a prince. But I hasten to add that he’s astonishingly bad at it.)

Sometimes it seems like every fantasy novel I pick up is crewed by the same group:

• The sullen yet hot warrior who is certainly hiding a secret (it probably has to do with sex)
• The sassy thief
• The wise elder (also a thief, possibly retiring, clearly not going to make it to the sequel)
• And of course our hero, the member of nobility who under the cover of darkness runs with a bad crowd because Daddy Issues.

Any of them may be masquerading as the opposite gender because it’s…daring. My money is on the sassy thief.

Don’t any of these people have jobs? And no, I’m not counting ‘thief’ as a job. You can’t put it on a resume unless you’re actually applying to be a thief.

Even if we’ve decided it’s written in stone that Gondfloria has forests and castles and bears, we can still explore the lives of people living there without falling back on ‘princess’ or ‘thief.’

Here are a few suggestions, on the house: bear wrangler, bee keeper, lute carver, magical bee keeper (the bees, not the person), cook, fixer for the local mob boss, mob boss, magical bee keeper (the person, not the bees – gods, keep up!), innkeeper, wench (if you have an inn, you’ve got to have a wench; I don’t make the rules), bard, dog boy, horse girl, and then way down at the bottom, thief, and finally, princess. You’re welcome.

Look, we want our story to stand out in the enormous ocean of similarly themed and titled books. We can do that by either taping a $20 bill to the inside cover of each and every one…or by making it unique.

I look forward to reading your take on a hot yet sullen magical bee keeper who lives in the misty woods of Gondfloira. Feel free to get on your magical sassy pants and sprinkle some flash fiction in the comments. Also any suggestion for other cool roles (characters) who’ve been forgotten, overlooked, or given little or no love. Maybe one not yet thought about?

Oooooh, extra XP points!

Unicorn trainers? Those suckers are magical so surely they could be house-trained right? Dude in charge of the “Pigeon Messaging Service” that later was forced into rebranding and a name change because PMS a really bad name for a business in communication (one not involving knives and chocolate). Use your imagination! ALSO!

Are you tired of ye same olde same olde? Losing that loving feeling for fantasy because, when it’s all the same, that is well, to be blunt, the OPPOSITE of fantasy?

Next time: The Chosen One, or, It is foretold that you and you alone will fix this coffee maker and save mornings for all of Gondfloria!

***

I love hearing from you!

For the month of September, for everyone who leaves a comment, I will put your name in a hat. If you comment and link back to my blog on your blog, you get your name in the hat twice. What do you win? The unvarnished truth from yours truly. I will pick a winner once a month and it will be a critique of the first 20 pages of your novel, or your query letter, or your synopsis (5 pages or less).

NEW CLASSES FOR SEPTEMBER AND MORE!

All classes come with a FREE recording!

We’ve added in classes on erotica/high heat romance, fantasy, how to write strong female characters and MORE! Classes with me, with USA Today Best-Selling Author Cait Reynolds, award-winning author and journalist Lisa-Hall Wilson, and Kim Alexander, former host of Sirius XM’s Book Radio. So click on a tile and sign up!

(If you are getting this via email, open the blog post to see all the options and sign up!)

[abcf-grid-gallery-custom-links id=”22482″]

The post Putting the Fan BACK in Fantasy—Getting Past Ye Same Olde Same Olde appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

Denny Basenji doesn’t like it when I sneeze, so he spends most of his time hiding in his blanket fort.

Denny: Why get a cave bed when you can have your mama custom-drape a blanket fort for you?

If I had the energy, I’d actually be really excited about today’s guest blog post because Lisa and I are also teaching a workshop on this topic in September. We are going to be talking about how to create strong, authentic female characters in fiction. Lisa is specifically focusing on how to avoid extremes, tropes, and types. I will be talking about how to TRULY get into the mindset of historical female characters and what defines strong for them (which is going to be another blog post).

Okay, over to Lisa!

Character, not caricature.

Lisa here! Portraying strong women authentically is tricky. Most of the time, I find strong female characters are caricatures of an extreme: the dim-witted blond, the stock-in-trade man with boobs, the femme fatale. These are stereotypes sure, but what they really are is extreme examples of real life. Can you find an example from history of a female warrior in a male-dominated society – sure, but she’s an outlier. If you want to write an outlier character that’s fine, but let the traits that make her an outlier be the source of her strength not her ability to wield a sword.

Let’s look at a real-world example, Malala Yousafzai. She’s a strong woman, but is she strong because she survived a bullet wound to the head? Yes, partly, but moreso she’s strong because of the choices that led to her being targeted, and the friends and family who empowered her to follow her heart.

Are you able to portray women without these extremes that’s both likable (or at least worthy of cheering for) and surprises readers? That’s the tricky part.

Brave, not dumb.

I love to study Amazons, that mythical race of female warriors written of by the Greeks. The truth is that Amazons were a cautionary tale for their times. This is what might happen if women could make their own decisions about marriage, family, war or the economy. Exotic? Dangerous? Lust-worthy? Absolutely. But in nearly every Greek tale, the Amazons inevitably rush headlong into battle over pride or vanity and are overwhelmingly outnumbered against a professional army. That’s not heroic, it’s stupid. Most women, especially strong women, are not stupid.

The danger with the extremes is that characters become one-dimensional. The only reason that character exists is because the hero needs a woman to encourage him. You have no story-based reason for making that character female other than you liked that idea, needed a victim to motivate a male character to act, a reason to insert sex, etc. There was nothing about being female that placed obstacles in her path or helped that character succeed.

Ever did that experiment where you write on a coffee filter with a black marker, get the filter wet and see the variety of colors that went into making black? Strength is like the colors that make up that black marker. Strength is not one thing or act, just like black is not a primary color, but it’s your job as the writer to show all the different colors that make up that character’s strength.

Truth is a subtle strength.

Let’s look at Veronica Roth’s Tris. One of the first things we learn about her is that she chooses to leave Abnegation and join Dauntless because she knows herself and must be true to that. She makes that choice knowing what some of the consequences will be. That’s strength. There are a lot of natural obstacles in her way (one of them being female without any athletic training competing against guys), but she’s not afraid to make friends or find an ally. Being a lone wolf can represent strength but it’s also a self-protection mechanism rooted in fear.

I love 100. I know a lot of people point to Clarke as a strong character, but personally I’m more drawn to Octavia and Raven. These are girls who have fought their way to influence in a variety of ways and through painful personal sacrifices. We’ve seen them as outliers and leaders, run from pain, lash out in anger, deny their own desires, and escape from life. They are intelligent, courageous, fighters, who love, grieve, chase, hate, forgive – the whole spectrum. And each time they get knocked down, they blunder and stumble, but then they get stronger. That’s real life.

Female characters need to be strong, but they need to be real, varied, unique, and as individual as possible.

Want to get more in depth?

Check out the workshop that Lisa and I are offering in September!

Now and Then: Strong Female Characters in Historical and Contemporary Fiction

Instructors: Cait Reynolds and Lisa Hall-Wilson

Price: $70.00 USD

Where: W.A.N.A. Digital Classroom

When: Saturday, September 9, 2017. “Historical not Hysterical” 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. EST. “Beyond Lipstick and Swords” 2:00-4:00 p.m. EST

From fainting virgins to sexually-empowered widows, the ‘historical heroine’ attempts to accomplish the near-impossible: capture the sensibility and reality of the times while keeping the heroine relatable to modern readers.

Until we get time machines, we have to rely on research and our imaginations in order to create authentic, sympathetic historical heroines. The amount of research required can seem daunting, but this class is designed to give you a ‘jump start’ with some basic facts, tricks for getting into your heroine’s head, and hints on how to research efficiently and with confidence.

This class will cover the following topics – and much more:

• Vital statistics: how to determine the correct age for your female character based on time period;
• The Three E’s: Education, Entertainment, and Etiquette;
• Dressing the part: how to capture the feel of an era’s fashions without Mary Sue shopping sprees;
• Housekeeping from princesses to privy pots;
• The Three F’s: Faith, Fierceness, and Fiancés. What your female character believes is her destiny and what actually is her destiny;
• Tips and tricks for quick research.

A recording of this class is also included with purchase.

About the Instructor:

Cait Reynolds is a USA Today Bestselling Author and lives in the Boston area with her husband and four-legged fur child. She discovered her passion for writing early and has bugged her family and friends with it ever since. When she isn’t cooking, running, rock climbing, or enjoying the rooftop deck that brings her closer to the stars, she writes.

Want to create strong female characters with depth and vitality but avoid clichés and tired tropes? This class will explore the pitfalls and old ruts writers fall into when creating strong female characters, and what to strive for instead. Because what if your character doesn’t wield a sword or own a power suit – are they still strong?

Learn what’s missing from many depictions of strong female characters and how to write them in a realistic way even if you’re writing fantasy! Joss Whedon isn’t the only one who can write strong female characters – and Wonder Woman isn’t the only type of strong female character you can write.

Some of what you’ll learn:

• What makes women strong;
• Making female warriors believable;
• Shaping societal forces;
• Women are not men;
• Women in community;
• Character agency.

Lisa Hall-Wilson is an award-winning journalist and novelist, and writing teacher. She grew up watching and reading about women like Wonder Woman, Princess Allura, Jo March, She-Ra, Catherine Chandler, Jessica Fletcher, and other less notable characters. After realizing she was repeating all of the tired tropes and stereotypes she hated, Lisa spent months studying strong female characters and learning what makes them authentic and real.

How This Class Works…

After registering, you’ll be sent an email confirmation which will provide you with login information for the online classroom we’ll be using. This class will be recorded so if you’re not able to make it in person you’ll have the recording within two or three days. Come prepared with a sense of humor and a notepad. Yes, this class will be recorded if you can’t make it live, but you want to be there!

About the Instructor

Lisa Hall-Wilson is an Award-Winning Author and Journalist and she LOVES to mentor writers. She’s been a freelance writer for ten years turning her love of words into an income. Her passion is to help beginning writers hone their skills and become published storytellers, so look for her classes to go beyond basics and challenge you.

NEW CLASSES FOR SEPTEMBER AND MORE!

All classes come with a FREE recording!

We’ve added in classes on erotica/high heat romance, fantasy, how to write strong female characters and MORE! Classes with me, with USA Today Best-Selling Author Cait Reynolds, award-winning author and journalist Lisa-Hall Wilson, and Kim Alexander, former host of Sirius XM’s Book Radio. So click on a tile and sign up!

[abcf-grid-gallery-custom-links id=”22482″]

The post The Write Stuff: Creating Strong, Authentic Female Characters appeared first on Kristen Lamb.

This fall, W.A.N.A. is back with new classes, new instructors, and lots of exciting announcements coming up. Bookmark W.A.N.A. and make sure to subscribe to my blog to stay up-to-date with all the news!

Don’t forget to hop on over to the W.A.N.A. Tribe to join in our daily writing sprints in the chat room! The Tribe is a thriving community, and we are planning on some awesome upgrades to the entire Tribe experience this fall.

NEW CLASSES FOR SEPTEMBER 2017

[abcf-grid-gallery-custom-links id=”22482″]

The post Back to School – New W.A.N.A. Classes for September! appeared first on Kristen Lamb.