Welcome to today's post on the A-to-Z Blogging Challenge. My challenge, as I have chosen to accept it, is thus: I have asked on my Facebook and Twitter accounts for people to contribute random words beginning with today's letter. From Random.org, I have selected one of these words, and will below challenge myself to connect said word to writing.
For the letter O, I received 32 suggestions. Random.org selected number 4: ordinary.
Ordinary
As writers, we want—no, we NEED—our work to be extraordinary. We need to avoid the slush pile and make some agent take notice. We need to catch the eye of a publisher. We need to make the public notice us and buy our book. It calls for lots of footwork, both physical and virtual, to accomplish these tasks.
So, how do we do that? Can we just write about the most extraordinary characters we can think of, put them in the craziest situations that come to mind, make the writing as flamboyant as possible, and hope that we get someone's attention?
Am I alone here in thinking "no"?
Sometimes the best writing is the simplest.
Sometimes the most compelling characters are the ones who seem the most ordinary.
Why is that? Why is it easier for me to relate to some lazy high school girl who makes the teachers think she's smart when all she does is watch TV and read for fun when she goes home, or hangs out with her friends? *cough* Because I've been (something) like that. This doesn't mean that I can't relate to a forty-something man, or a five-year old who's never left a room (who's read that?), or an eighty-year-old dementia patient. It's more like I can't relate as easily to the five-legged superhero who always wins and gets the girl/guy and has super flame-throwing vision and...
You get the idea.
The best hero is the anti-hero. Jane Doe, with all her faults and quirks and the little things that make her human.
What kinds of faults do you give your characters? If you write genre fiction and your characters aren't 100% ordinary, how do you make them feel ordinary to the reader?
Welcome
Welcome to my self-indulgent location for the stories (good and bad) that I can't prevent myself from writing. All comments and criticisms welcome. I post on Tuesdays and Saturdays.
Showing posts with label genre. Show all posts
Showing posts with label genre. Show all posts
Monday, April 18, 2011
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Eclectic (#atozchallenge)
First, on a slightly unrelated to the A-to-Z Challenge, Carol Riggs is hosting and critiquing the first 250 words of one of my WsIP, UNDERGROUND, a YA Dystopian novel. Head over to her blog to check it out, and feel free to critique it further. That's what it's there for. Trust me--I can take it :)
____________________
Welcome to today's post on the A-to-Z Blogging Challenge. My challenge, as I have chosen to accept it, is thus: I have asked on my Facebook and Twitter accounts for people to contribute random words beginning with today's letter. From Random.org, I have selected one of these words, and will below challenge myself to connect said word to writing.
For the letter E, I received 42 suggestions. Random.org selected number 32: eclectic.
PS--My Mondays and Wednesdays have me running around without good internet access all day until 9pm EST (US). I'll get back to you, but it might be late tonight.
Eclectic
Is it okay to be eclectic as a writer? What I mean by this is: Are we limited to the genre in which we market our first work? Or can we branch out? Can a romance author pen a cozy mystery? Can an MG author for boys write YA for girls? Can a picture book author write an adventure series for adults?
And does that author HAVE to use a pen name to do it?
Don't get me wrong, I understand the need to focus on what we're good at. And, well, I'm not ready to walk away from my 16-23 year old girls and women quite yet (yup, that's my select audience). But, if I wanted to, how would the publishing world (assuming I could break into it) accept my wanting to try something different?
I'm not saying I'm going that route now. I'm just saying, shouldn't it be possible?
What do you think? Is an eclectic writer bad? Would you read a romance author's attempt at a thriller?
PS--Today I'm taking suggestions for I. Have some? Leave them below.
____________________
Welcome to today's post on the A-to-Z Blogging Challenge. My challenge, as I have chosen to accept it, is thus: I have asked on my Facebook and Twitter accounts for people to contribute random words beginning with today's letter. From Random.org, I have selected one of these words, and will below challenge myself to connect said word to writing.
For the letter E, I received 42 suggestions. Random.org selected number 32: eclectic.
PS--My Mondays and Wednesdays have me running around without good internet access all day until 9pm EST (US). I'll get back to you, but it might be late tonight.
Eclectic
[i'klektik] -- adjective: deriving ideas, style, or taste from a broad and diverse range of sources.
Is it okay to be eclectic as a writer? What I mean by this is: Are we limited to the genre in which we market our first work? Or can we branch out? Can a romance author pen a cozy mystery? Can an MG author for boys write YA for girls? Can a picture book author write an adventure series for adults?
And does that author HAVE to use a pen name to do it?
Don't get me wrong, I understand the need to focus on what we're good at. And, well, I'm not ready to walk away from my 16-23 year old girls and women quite yet (yup, that's my select audience). But, if I wanted to, how would the publishing world (assuming I could break into it) accept my wanting to try something different?
I'm not saying I'm going that route now. I'm just saying, shouldn't it be possible?
What do you think? Is an eclectic writer bad? Would you read a romance author's attempt at a thriller?
PS--Today I'm taking suggestions for I. Have some? Leave them below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)