Judging a Book's Cover: A Cover Critique of Only Half Alive

Earlier this week I logged onto Facebook to see this:

Konstanz Silverbow's cover reveal. And I loved it so much, I had to share it. You may or may not like it. But either way, this cover works. And I'm going to pull it apart to show how it conveys its genre and story in order to appeal to its target audience.

(Please note I have not read this book. This is a breakdown entirely based on the cover content.)

Many authors who publish traditionally don't have much, if any, say in what their covers look like, but they can still benefit from what I'm going to talk about. And, with more and more people self-publishing, more and more authors have to come up with their own covers, so this may be helpful for them too. Unfortunately. . . I've seen some awful indie covers. I won't post any up here, but, if you want an example, it shouldn't be hard to find one. Konstanz Silverbow is self-publishing this novel. She had Stephanie White design the cover. Here's why it works.

(Please take time to read the back cover--in italics below--to follow along with the critique.)

The world's darkest creature, will be their brightest hope. While darkness haunts her, she craves the light. Christina is a demon, but she doesn't want to be. She is willing to sacrifice everything to change it. Only one person stands in her way, and he will stop at nothing to keep her the way she is. The greatest battle of light vs dark threatens every living creature, a battle that could destroy all. And the demon in love will only have one chance to save everyone.

Read More

Editing From the Inside Out

As I'm editing my novel, I'm going through different passes, each one focused on one or two aspects of the novel. And I'm fleshing out the heart of the story before I worry about the details. Why focus on the word choice of a scene before I have the plot figured out? For all I know, I might have to cut the scene that I just spent a half hour nitpicking word usage over. So, when editing, consider focusing on the most important elements of the story before worrying about things like stylistic punctuation. Edit from the inside out because--

1- It saves on time. You're less likely to invest a large chunk of time into a scene that will eventually be cut or changed.

2- It makes it easier to cut what doesn't belong in your story. When you've invested loads of time into a plot turn or character, you won't rush to chop them out of your manuscript. It's like a long-term relationship. It's harder to say goodbye. If you edit from the inside out, on the other hand, you can do plenty of painless yanking.

Creating An Editing Plan

First, look at your manuscript, and decide what is most important to your story (or, what needs the most work): plot, theme, character, or setting. Those are the big four.

Read More

Leading with Your Strengths

Several months ago, I had a realization that changed how I approach everything in life. Sometimes I lead with my weaknesses. When faced with challenges, I lead with my weaknesses. Often when meeting new people, I lead with my weaknesses. When in times of trial, I lead with my weaknesses.

I conduct myself based on my shortcomings, focus on what I'm lacking--not in a depressing sort of way, but it's at the forefront of my persona. I lead with what I don't have, what I don't know. I let those things be the back bone of what defines me. Sometimes.

This approach is self-crippling.

It feeds insecurities, doubts, and low self-esteem.

Once I had this realization, I thought about my friends who are genuinely confident. It's not that they don't have weaknesses. They lead with their strengths. They let their strengths be at the forefront of their persona, let their strengths define them first.

Leading with your strengths doesn't mean ignoring your shortcomings. Acknowledge your weaknesses and work to overcome them. But don't define yourself by what you are lacking. Start with what you know, your strengths, and then work out from there. Truly confident people don't overlook their flaws. They know they are good enough in spite of them. Their strengths come first. Their weaknesses come second.

When you lead with your strengths, miraculous things begin to happen. You feel more capable of meeting challenges and more worthy of success. You feel happier. Because, you are.

I now make a conscious effort to lead with my strengths in all that I do. While I doubt people can tell a difference in my demeanor, I feel different.

So go forward in life and lead with your strengths in all that you do. Especially when faced with a challenge out of your comfort zone--remember what you know and what you are good at first. Then work from there.

(This post was somewhat inspired by Elder Jeffery R. Holland's talk on faith. You can read it here.)

Follower Spotlight

Bonnie Gwyn was one of the first people to welcome me into the blogging world. She's a teenager, a writer, and loves to blog about being Mormon. You'll frequently find her in good attitude. Thanks for following me, Bonnie!

Read More

Let Your Reader Do the Work

I have the opportunity to read a lot of unpublished content, and every so often I find a story where the writer doesn't let their readers do the emotional work. I've heard the writing rule that if your character is crying, then your reader doesn't have to. At first I wasn't sure how much I agreed with it, but after I read it, I started paying attention.

Here are the examples I ran into. Harry Potter: while Harry is on the verge of crying several times in the series, he almost never does. Fact: I cried more in those books than any other book I've ever read. And thousands of people cried too. In Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, Jean Valjean weeps several times just in the first 200 pages. I never cried once. (And anyone who knows the story, knows how heart wrenching it is.)

If Harry broke down and bawled all the time, I don't know that I would have. I may have still gotten teary-eyed, but I don't think I would have sobbed like I did. There is something about having your character cry that takes the tension out of the reader. The character is doing the emotional work, so the reader doesn't have to.

I soon realized this applied to more than crying. In one unpublished story I read, one of the characters was often worrying about a mystery. She asked all the questions, did all the wondering, the worrying, and I found that I, as a reader, didn't have to. And you know what? I wasn't as engaged. The author didn't let me do that part. So instead of participating in the story, I was merely "watching" it.

I Open at the Close by Yume Dust

I'm not saying you can never have your characters cry etc. (there is a time and place), but keep it minimal. You want to build up those feelings in your reader so that they experience the story, not just read about it. Just because you didn't write that your characters were crying, or worried, or angry doesn't mean they weren't. 

In fact, I've come to accept that those passages where I was bawling my eyes out were moments where I was vicariously crying as Harry. And that's what you want as a writer. You want your readers to be in the character, in the story, because only then can they reach that deep, emotional plane where the story leaves an indelible mark on them.

So when your character is sad, anxious, fearful, embarrassed, or angry, instead of focusing on how the character feels and reacts emotionally to it, focus on how to elicit those emotions in your readers, so that they become part of the story. This is often done by focusing on the event that caused those emotions and rendering it in a way that amplifies those emotions. For example, how much emotion do these sentences conjure?

Harry watched Sirius fall through the archway to his death. Harry couldn't believe it. He was upset and started crying.

How much more emotion does this passage conjure?

It seemed to take Sirius an age to fall. His body curved in a graceful arc as he sank backward through the ragged veil hanging from the arch. . . . 

Read More

The Wizarding World: Your Vicarious Experience, Part 2

Last post I started my tour of The Wizarding World of Harry Potter. Here is the second half.

Rides, Wands, and Hogwarts Castle

Further up the street you find a roller coaster: Flight of the Hippogriff. You heard it was family friendly. This is something everyone in your party can do.

While waiting in line, you find Hagrid's Hut.

And sneak a paparazzi picture of Buckbeak.

You sit and pull down a lap bar...then blast around the track! Family friendly? What was the lady thinking!? You were expecting a Mister Toad's Wild Ride, but you got something a step below Big Thunder Railroad! You scream in surprise and zoom around the track.

Behold! You have finally arrived at Hogwarts! And it's magnificent! The wait for this attraction is always long, because not only do you get to explore the castle, but board a one-of-a-kind ride: Harry Potter and the Forbidden Journey.

Read More

The Wizarding World: Your Vicarious Experience

Writerly Adventures

 Ever wanted to go to Harry Potter land in Universal in Orlando, Florida? Or have you already been? This is a very detailed vicarious experience for anyone who wants to go, or, who wants to go back.

Welcome to the World of Harry Potter

Congratulations! You made it to Universal's Islands of Adventure! Unfortunately there are SO many tall trees in Florida that despite your excitement, you can't even get a glimpse of Hogwarts until you've reached this bridge near the back of the park. This is an epic moment. Take a picture.

Travel a little further and you come to another bridge with a better view. This picture sums it all up.

Finally you've made it! Compared to the rest of the park, this section shines. It literally looks like you are stepping into another world.

On your right, you see the scarlet Hogwarts Express. The conductor there is hilarious and makes snide comments about "muggle technology." The train lets out a jet of steam.

Read More

A Toast to the Closet Writers

Many writers, at some point or another, have been closet writers--they don't tell anyone they write, that they want to write, or that they are actually writing. If you find yourself in this situation, you're normal.

Writing can be very personal, like our story and characters are our own children. Or maybe you're a closet writer because you fear what others will think about you if they saw what you wrote, or because you fear you aren't good enough. Or maybe, you're just not ready to share your work yet.

Some of the best writers have been closet writers, and there are wonderful perks to being one.

So here is a toast to closet writers.

Successful Closet Writers

New York Times bestselling author David Farland admits to being a closet writer as a teenager. He'd hide his manuscript, fearing someone would find it. Now he has over 50 books in print (several of which have won awards), has worked in the movie and video game businesses, and is also a writing instructor.

But there are different levels of being a closet writer. Perhaps you aren't a full-fledged one.

While I don't know if Rowling actually kept the fact she wrote a secret, she kept what she was writing secret. She never even told her mother about Harry Potter. And even after publication, she was still somewhat of a closet writer: she showed no one her manuscripts. The first person to read them was her editor.

The Perks of being a Closet Writer

If you are a closet writer, you have something beautiful.

Read More

Good News: You don't have to be Perfect, just Exceptional

Right now I'm reading The Maze Runner by James Dashner, and it's a real pager-turner. The only reason I'm not reading it right now is because I'm reading it with someone, so we have to get our schedules to match up. (I'm definitely writing a review when we're done). 

Dashner has created a thrilling plot that takes advantage of hooks. I love this book's set-up. He captures some great images. But like all books, the writing has some shortcomings. I think I've read the phrase "Thomas was surprised that," and "Thomas felt" once every three pages, and those phrases become trite, drawing too much attention to themselves. It's a minor problem.

Does that mean Dashner is a "bad writer?" No!! His plot, hooks, setting, and dialogue are brilliant. 

He's not perfect. He's exceptional.

If you're a writer, you don't have to be perfect either. You just have to be good enough. Don't let perfection stop you from moving forward or doing what you love. If you want to be published, you only have to be great. If you want to pen a bestseller, you just need to be exceptional.

Even fantastic and bestselling authors have flaws. Ally Condie isn't great with character voice. I don't think Stephenie Meyer can write action scenes. Christopher Paolini wanders in his own world too much, making his pacing wobbly at times, and some of his plot is too cliche. J.K. Rowling isn't that great at writing romance. J. R. R. Tolkien's characters aren't very dimensional. Orson Scott Card mostly "tells" his stories.

Don't wait to be perfect to be a writer. If you are good enough, you'll touch a reader. Don't wait to be perfect to be happy writing.

Like many writers, I really want my novel to succeed, hope it does, big time. But I had to acknowledge that realistically, that might not happen. There are too many factors out of my control.

But then I realized: even if my novel never made it onto a bookshelf, I'd be happier writing than not writing.

This post may not be for you. At least not now. But I think every serious writer, at some point, feels the pressure to be perfect. Please, keep improving. Keep honing your skills. But don't wait on perfection.


Ally Condie has a beautiful, poetic writing style that's so easy to swallow that, at times, it has made me envious. Stephenie Meyer can write about emotion like no other. Christopher Paolini not only has a rich writing style that's vivid and clear, but can render amazing action sequences and chilling horror scenes. J.K. Rowling is a master at sewing her plot together with even the most minuscule, selective details and pulling her readers so deep into her stories that they mourn and laugh vicariously with her characters. J. R. R. Tolkien is quite possibly unmatched in his intricate worldbuilding. Orson Scott Card can capture realistic dialogue.

Imagine how many lives they wouldn't have impacted if they had waited on perfection. They wouldn't have even impacted their own lives. At least not in the same way.

So go write! And if you are writing, keep going! Even if it's only for yourself to begin with.

And please, check out this great, short post about finding your own writing talent from David Farland.

Follower Spotlight

Charlie Puslipher is the author of Zombies at the Door and Crystal Bridge. He is a were-hamster and lemur enthusiast who lives in Saint George, Utah with his lovely wife and neurotic dog. He writes sci-fi and fantasy when he's not obsessing over the coming zombie-pocalypse. His velociraptor impression is worth seeing. It's probably the coolest thing about him. You can follow Charlie on Twitter or Facebook.

Read More

Balancing Questions and Answers

I'm working on the second draft of my manuscript, and this last week I hit a point where I realized I was making my reader ask too many questions too soon. Some questions are good--they make the reader want to keep reading. Too many questions equals confusion, which was the direction my novel was going.

I love mystery, so while I'm writing fantasy, I'm also incorporating a lot of mystery, dropping hints and clues along the plot line and making the reader wonder and speculate.

But too many questions too fast makes it difficult for readers to follow the plot. They can't keep track of what is going on. They can't even keep track of everything they should be wondering about.

Here are some ways to solve that problem if you find yourself in a similar situation:

1. Answer some of the readers' questions. Provide more information before making them ask more questions. This might mean pushing answers toward the front of your story and moving other questions back.
2. Eliminate questions. Are you trying to make too many things into a mystery? Tweak how you are presenting the info to your reader. Don't make them wonder. Tell them the info straight out and tell them as soon as possible.
3. Let your characters question less and wonder less. The more your characters are wondering on paper, the more conscious your reader is of all the unsolved questions and mysteries. If you find that you are giving your reader too many questions, try changing your characters' response to them. Instead of having your heroine speculate, have her come to a conclusion (hopefully a wrong one) based on the info she has. Then let her be convinced that she's right.
4. Connect your questions so that they really form one big question. Create an umbrella question. That way your reader won't be stuck with a dozen different, unrelated questions. So instead of wondering "How did the bomb get passed security?" "Whose spying on the protagonist?" and "Are George and Jasper really working together to commit murder?" You make the reader ask, "What is organization X up to?" (since organization X is involved in all of these situations.) Tie questions together.

For me, I used a combination of three and four. Instead of having my protagonist sitting around speculating, I made him come to a conclusion (that's partially wrong) that connects all of his questions. And he's convinced he's right. 

It made the story shape more interesting and actually helped me discover a whole new facet of my protagonist--one that I hadn't considered, but yet fit his character perfectly.

I've also used techniques one and two in the past. I might need to use them still. I'll decide when I get to draft three.

Follower Spotlight

Konstanz Silverbow has an amazing work ethic and can write novels as fast as a kid eats Halloween candy. I've noticed that Konstanz is very friendly and very open to helping others. Despite others telling her she would never make it as a writer, she's kept going, and has a novel that will be available this fall. Follow her blog, follow her on twitter, or "like" her on Facebook.

Read More

Mists, Metals, and Heists: A Review of Mistborn by Brandon Sanderson

Fiction for Readers

Once, a hero arose to save the world. A young man with a mysterious heritage courageously challenged the darkness that strangled the land.

He failed.

For a thousand years since, the world has been a wasteland of ash and mist ruled by the immortal emperor know as the Lord Ruler. Every revolt has failed miserably.

Yet somehow, hope survives. Hope that dares to dream of ending the empire and even the Lord Rule himself. A new kind of uprising is being planned, one built around the ultimate caper, one that depends on the cunning of a brilliant criminal mastermind and the determination of an unlikely heroine, a street urchin who must learn to master Allomancy, the power of a Mistborn.

Who is it for?

Mistborn is a high fantasy novel that will appeal to both hard fantasy fans and the casual fantasy reader. If you like fresh action, other worlds, magic systems, heists, and characters with personality, this one is for you. 

Though marketed for adults, one of the main characters is a 16-year-old girl, the other, the criminal mastermind, is an adult man, so the novel can capture both teenagers and adults, males and females, people who like intense fight scenes and people who like to dress up to attend political balls and possibly fall in love with a nobleman.

Storyline and Review

I only had to get several pages into the novel to know that I was in the hands of a storytelling master. 

The narrative follows Kelsier, a charismatic, happy madman, who has escaped the clutches of the Lord Ruler (losing his wife in the process) and now plans to overthrow the Lord Ruler himself; and Vin, a poor, young girl who has learned to survive the slums of the criminal world by making herself invisible (figuratively) and trusting no one.

These two characters create a great contrast, and Sanderson gives them wonderful voices, so you know who they are and what they're about almost immediately, and you love them. Several of the main characters have very strong, clear personalities. (Although I have to admit, I had a harder time differentiating some of the more minor characters. )

The world they live on only rains ash, and mysterious mists seep into the streets every night. Society is basically split into two classes: the noblemen and the skaa--the slaves who support the noblemen and the Lord Ruler. Many of the noblemen are Mistings, people who can ingest a specific metal to gain a special ability. Because the noblemen have raped skaa, some of the skaa are Mistings as well.

I have to say that the idea of people swallowing vials of metal that can enable them to influence others' emotions, pull and push on metallic objects without contact (think Magneto, sort of), and even affect time, was awesome! The action scenes Sanderson created with this "magic" were astounding!

The set-up and plot were fresh. How many fantasy stories are there where the main character is pure, a prophecy has been made, and he has to defeat an epic villain? Mistborn turns that expectation upside down. We are in a world where the prophesied "Hero" has already failed, and we're following lovable thieves as they gather underground skaa armies, steal from the emperor, and impostor noblemen. 

The twists in the last third of the book were shocking, amazing, and satisfactory--there is no way anyone can see all of them coming.

If You Read it You Should Know

Read More

The Value of Shock, Part 3

I've been getting some really interesting comments on this "Value of Shock" series, so I'm going to scrap some of what I had for this last post and share some of them instead:

"I have never used shocking descriptive writing in a serious work because I do find that it can overpower what I'm trying to get across. I use plot and the storyline for creating shock rather than the way I am writing, I find it can be just as effective if done right." -Ruby Eclipse

"I think the difference between shock-scenes in books vs movies is that in a book we can take the shock as far as our imagination will let us. So while some paint a mental picture in pale red others go for the whole blood red dripping. In movies on the other hand the makers decide for the audience so that the shock value is often aimed at the higher end of the audience. This of course can be totally [off] if they judge the audience incorrectly and will be of overkill for those of the viewers that do not require that impact."-Katbaroo

"I have to say it honestly depends on what I'm working on. Sometimes it is relevant to character development. In others it's too draw attention to something particular. But I try to always make sure there is a purpose of some sort."-Endre Smouth

"It's all a matter of perspective. What one person views as gratuitous, another could view as mild. It is a balancing act to be sure. I feel it is important to keep in mind the big picture, while not catering to a highly conservative nor highly liberal point of view. If you seek to shock, then shock, but know your audience."-Anonymous

(If you are interested in reading more comments outside of blogger, you can find them here and here.)

The Audience

So how shocking is too shocking? When does it leave reasons one through three and veer into four? Katbaroo and Anonymous already beat me to it. It depends on your audience. Honestly, I think there are some stories that have shock strictly for the sake of it, but outside of that, it depends on the audience. What is shocking to one person isn't necessarily shocking to another.

Last time I talked about the two scenes I found too shocking for me in Les Miserables. Anonymous didn't feel that they were too shocking, while Shane Halbach said his wife agreed, "on some level." People have different shock value ranges.

So what's one secret to keeping your shocking content under control?

Know your audience.

Read More

The Value of Shock, Part 2

Earlier, I discussed why you might want to shock your readers, and I also mentioned that if you decide to shock your readers, you want to make sure you don't overdo it. If you write content that is too shocking, it draws too much attention to itself and takes away from the point you are trying to make.

This is what I experienced when I saw the latest film adaptation of Les Miserables. First, I'd like to say that I love Les Mis. But there were a couple of scene I found shocking, too shocking.

Fantine’s whole prostitute experience was shocking. But it’s not gratuitous. It’s supposed to make viewers feel uncomfortable. It fulfills reasons one through three in my last post. But for me, it went to far. By the time Fantine actually sleeps with another man, I was too overwhelmed.

The other scene that went too far was the “Master of the House” scene. I was fine, at first, but watching Santa in the bridal suite was too much. I understand they pulled Santa into that scene to illustrate what a twisted, perverted place the Master’s house was, but when they put him in bed, they way overdid it.

So, these scenes took too much of my attention. In reality, Les Mis isn’t about Fantine's prostitution, or Santa in the bridal suite. Fantine’s experience is an element of the story, yes, but it isn’t the sum of the story. Jolting moments should add to the overall story, the theme, not take away from it. 

I know these two scenes took me away from the story because they lingered in my mind longer than they were supposed to. In fact, when I think of the movie, I first think of Valjean’s redemption, which is so powerful and wonderful, but within seconds, those two shocking scenes pop into my head. And I don’t want them to, because I loved the other parts of the movie so much more!

If you make a shocking scene too shocking, it becomes the very first thing viewers and readers discuss and remember. 

Read More

The Value of Shock

Shocking Your Readers the Right way for the Right Reasons

Sometimes as a writer, you might want to make your readers uncomfortable or shock them. Here are some reasons why—

1. You want to leave an impression on your readers
2. You want to inspire a change of heart, perspective, or action from your readers. Or simply increase their awareness of a specific issue.
3. You want to illustrate, realistically, how a particular situation is.
4. Just for sake of it, for effect.

Number four is usually referred to as “gratuitous”—it’s there for the sake of it. It doesn’t add to the story. It doesn’t further the plot. It’s just there.

One example that comes to mind is the first Transformers movie. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a decent movie, but it has gratuitous content: a random sexual conversation about the protagonist…having his own private time in his room, senseless swear words, sexual objectification of Megan Fox. To me, I felt like this kind of content was just put there for the sake of it (or to make sure the movie got a PG 13 rating, heaven forbid it got a PG rating, then no one would take it seriously, right?). None of this really added to the theme or plot of the movie.

Honestly, what girl sticks her rear-end out and curves her back that much when she's looking under a hood?

Many writers, (including myself,) consider gratuitous writing, bad writing.

Let’s look at an example that isn’t gratuitous. Although shocking and horrific, the content of The Hunger Games is there for thematic purposes. The loudest point of the books is that we shouldn’t have an entertainment industry like the Capitol’s—one that glorifies violence. The series illustrate how under the guise of “entertainment,” evil acts can become acceptable ones. (It's a worldly truth.)

Collins shocks her readers to get her point across. It worked on me. I think twice about the “entertainment” I choose, and the story made me want to change our entertainment industry. Collins’ message wouldn’t have been conveyed as well if her readers didn’t actually witness the atrocities of Panem. The bloodshed had a purpose to the story.

Another example that uses shocking content to good effect is Tadeusz Borowski’s short story “This Way to the Gas, Ladies and Gentlemen,” which takes place at a Death Camp during the Holocaust. Was the content put there for the sake of it? No. The author includes it to illustrate, realistically, what happened—he would know, he was there. The story increases readers’ awareness of the events that took place in our history.



(Note: a lot of “worldly truth” stories contain shocking content that is thematic as opposed to gratuitous. A lot of “deceptive” stories contain content that is gratuitous.)

There are writers and readers who don’t want any shocking content, and stories that don’t need any. That’s perfectly fine.

A Thin Line—Pulling Back

If you decide your story needs shocking content, you walk a fine line. For a writer, the challenge comes from making the content jolting enough that it fulfills reasons one through three above without making it so shocking that it drifts into reason four, because you can overdo it.

Read More

Limitless: What Authors do to their Characters

When Breaking Dawn by Stephenie Meyer released, my friend and I discussed that someone should die in the last third, to make the story more interesting. But I think, somewhere, a part of me knew it wouldn’t happen. Meyer doesn’t kill good guys in the Twilight saga. Sure, Harry Clearwater has a heart attack, but I mean killing characters fans are emotionally attached to, like Alice, Emmett, or at least Seth. I’ve wondered if Meyer liked her characters too much to kill them.

In contrast, when I read The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins and The Runelords by David Farland, I found myself questioning whether the authors loved their characters much at all. In The Hunger Games, characters not only die, but are burned, poisoned, tortured, have limbs amputated, are forced into prostitution, and even brainwashed. Young, old, male, female, likable, unlikable, good guys, bad guys, named, nameless all suffered at Collins’ hands. Likewise in The Runelords, a stunning princess turns hideous, a stately King becomes mentally handicapped and can't even control his own bowels, and often strong, intelligent people are reduced to insanity and then murdered.

Sometimes in these novels, as a reader, I felt the authors had no limits. And I was scared. What could possibly happen next? Was anyone safe? Would the King ever regain his status, or was he doomed to die in his own filth? I had to read to find out.

Not all stories need to be as limitless as The Hunger Games and The Runelords to be good stories and to keep people reading, but notice that what Collins and Farland did added more tension to their novels. Also note that early in their stories, they let the reader know that nothing is safe. So as a reader, you have the whole series to worry.

And of course, putting your characters through heck doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t love them or that you harm them senselessly. J.K. Rowling loved all the “good guys” she killed. In New York she said she hated writing a particular death scene for The Casual Vacancy, but felt it had to be there for thematic purposes. Collins and Farland didn’t harm their characters for the sake of it either. In their cases, their characters’ ailments came with the backdrop of the story—horrible things happen in the worlds and societies their protagonists live in.

Should Meyer have killed a likeable character in Breaking Dawn? Maybe not in the way we would see in The Hunger Games or The Runelords—the Twilight story didn’t call for it. But perhaps a different death or misfortune may have fit and added tension.  Or maybe I’m just twisted and like to see characters suffer and die. Or both.

Whatever the case, when we write, perhaps we should consider what our stories’ limits are and how early to alert our readers to them. Giving your reader a heads up not only makes them worry and adds tension, but if anything horrific is going to happen to a main character, they need a warning.  Our readers grow attached to our characters, and if we do something awful to the protagonist without any kind of foreshadowing, they’ll feel betrayed.

(Imagine, for example, if in My Big Fat Greek Wedding, the main characters was suddenly hit and killed by a random car. Readers would say "Hey! That's not what I signed up for! I wanted a happy ending!" That incident doesn't fit with the limits the story set up.)



Thoughts? Do you like reading limitless books? Can you think of anymore examples?

Read More