POV from 4 Perspectives

By Gayle Bartos-Pool

Fiction writers have a choice to make as to “from whence cometh” the viewpoint of the story being told. In simpler words: Who’s telling the story? Of course, the writer is the one actually coming up with the plot, but the writer has a decision to make. Is the narrative to be written in First Person where the guy telling the story is, well, telling the story from his singular perspective or is the writer going to be more omniscient and relate the account from his own point of view? Afterall, the writer knows the entire sequence of events no matter who’s speaking.

I’ve discussed this topic before, but I thought I’d revisit it and take a closer look at the options facing the writer.

First Person – One POV with Strength and Limitations 

The writer does have total control over the narrative, but sometimes a story is better told if one main character lets the reader know what’s happening. Afterall, every human being is master of his own destiny, “Big Brother” notwithstanding. (Read 1984 to get the point if you don’t already know that book by George Orwell.) Outside events affect us all individually and we handle them one at a time or even several at a time when something major happens. It’s the same with a First Person character who has to deal with all the things that impact his or her life.

The First Person POV narrative lets that character reflect on how he handled things in his past and how that knowledge will help him solve the current problem. Knowing things about that character makes him more relatable to the reader. When I was writing my Johnny Casino Casebook series I “discovered” many things in Johnny’s past that explained why some things were happening in the present and also why he was who he was at that point in time. I, as well as the reader, gradually learned new things about the guy that moved the various short stories along. He didn’t just appear out of nowhere. He had a past and it impacted the current story that he was telling.

That earlier knowledge of the main character is also why I always write a biography about him or her so I know more about them and also why they would be doing what they are doing. There are tons of old movies that cover what’s happening at the time with no mention of the character’s past, but writing a book gives the writer and that main character an opportunity to tell the reader about their earlier life.

Take for example Gone with the Wind. The novel tells a whole lot more about Scarlette’s mother and other events that pre-date the story we see on the silver screen. The movie would have to be eight hours long to cover everything as written in the book. A TV series can give the main character a chance to tell some of his past when new characters are introduced sometime during the season. But a TV series can run four or five or even eight seasons so a lot of the character’s past can be revealed over that time period.

But that main character in a First Person POV story can “think” about something from their past that is impacting their present. Just a brief thought can explain why they feel the way they do because of that past episode in their life. And sometimes hearing from the character through his thoughts makes a deeper impression than just having a paragraph explain it. Just like a phone call from a friend who relates a personal story is far more impactful than a text message especially if they don’t spell everything out so “u can read it 4 yourself.” How impersonal.

And who’s better than the character himself telling the reader what he’s feeling inside. It’s sort of a friend to a friend conversation. You’re now part of his inner circle. And you’re seeing something that no one else sees since you’re reading that book alone. It’s up to the writer to dole out those tidbits a little at a time, gradually bringing the reader deep inside the story or should I say deep inside the heart and soul of that character.

That’s why when you write from the First Person POV you need to add those subtle touches that draw a clearer picture of your character. But you can also drop in some hard-hitting truths about the character that make him even more real. Stuff buried deep inside the guy that helped form his personality. And how about some deeper things that only he knows until he finds someone to share them with later in life…if at all. But the reader got to hear them and knows the character better because of those revelations.

That’s what you, the writer, gets to do when you write in the First Person POV.

The Second Person POV isn’t used very often because it uses “you” as the narrator of the story. “You” are the main character, and everything is happening to “you.” There are a few novels done in that style, but in those books “you” don’t really have your hand on the wheel. “You” are being driven around, but “you” have no control of the vehicle. It would be like a Tesla taking you someplace and “you” didn’t get to program the destination.

But what about a Third Person POV and the various options facing the writer. When the writer records what each character is doing as it happens and what each is saying at the time but not getting too deep into anybody’s brain and learning every private thought the characters are thinking, the story is slowly revealed by actual actions. All those hidden truths will be revealed near the end of the book when more and more things are uncovered as one character confronts another and the truth is exposed.

This is more like real life since none of us are mind readers. It can make it even more tense since we don’t know what the hero or other characters are thinking or what anyone might know about the other characters. Not that the hero in a First Person novel knows what the killer or anybody else is pondering or what brought any of them to that place at that time, but he does have insights that he shares with the reader. In a Third Person novel, only the writer knows the truth, and it is revealed slowly as we are nearing the climax.

This “peeling of the onion” as it were tells the story chapter by chapter, character by character, as each person reveals more about themselves and the facts in the story. That’s how real people live their own lives, learning new stuff day by day, encounter by encounter. It also lets everybody in the story have a story themselves. The writer has to let those individuals speak for themselves and not necessarily have the First Person character give a brief biography of each person he encounters. Not that he would be wrong, though when the main character misjudges someone and discovers his mistake later, we do get some great tension.

But Third Person POV allows the writer to let each character speak for themself and everybody, the main character and the reader, has to decide if it’s true or should there be more investigation (or reading) to discover the actual truth.

Then there is the Third Person Omniscient POV. That’s when the author is telling the story strictly from his own perspective and he tells you strictly what he wants you to know at any given time. It’s a much stiffer telling and not my favorite, more like what a lawyer would present in a court case, holding back some things until the right time. The Omniscient POV can do a flashback or take the reader in many directions as the story is revealed. They have done that in the movies when the camera can be somewhere nobody else could be, but it does tell the story. Seeing the past or even the future can help tell a story, but it takes something outside the realm of the characters themselves to get to those places.

So, there are several ways to tell your story. Which one works best for you?

Topics! Again.

by Linda O. Johnson

Last time I did a post here my topic was Blog Topics. This month, for a variety of reasons, I was given a very short time to write my blog—and no, I hadn’t yet chosen any topics for this month.

I went back to others’ posts here at Writers in Residence to get ideas. I admire my fellow bloggers, but still nothing immediately came to mind for me.

Hey, I’m used to writing nearly all the time. New ideas pop into my mind a lot for my mysteries and romantic suspense stories. I’m editing a story in my new Harlequin Romantic Suspense series, the second one, and soon have to write the third one.

I also blog frequently here and elsewhere.

And so you’d think I should be able to come up with an interesting topic right away. I even asked my dogs for ideas, and although they were eager to help—for treats—they didn’t come up with a quick topic.

Well, you can see where my mind went when I started to come up with a new idea immediately.

Anyway, last time when I blogged about topics, I did indicate that my next blog, this one, would be related to writing. And it is.

So, let me ask you this: Do you blog? If so, do you ever have to come up with ideas quickly? And you are finding it difficult. What do you do?

For those of you who comment on this blog site, why not send me ideas for my next post? Can’t promise I’ll use them, but I’d appreciate your helping me out because sometimes an idea doesn’t come as fast as you want and you have to admit that deadlines can be killers, but at least we know we all go through the same thing whether we have published work or are writing our first novel. All us writers are in the same boat and might need a little nudge, but I can guarantee you that I’ll have something next time. Promise.

A Writer Writes

by Rosemary Lord

I’ve had a hectic few weeks writing my new Los Angeles Then and Now book, as I realized the June deadline was looming. Why do we think we always have more time than is really available?

I’d been in England and Greece with my family – which was lovely. But even when I was there, I was mentally figuring when and where I could grab a couple of hours to research and write. Even half an hour would help. But I’m not one of those writers that can sit down – plonk! – and start writing. I’ve come to realize that I need to come down from my everyday life. Then time to mentally flatten things out, before I can switch into writer mode.

I think this is because I am not currently writing fiction – where I find I can, if I need, plonk myself down on the corner of a table and scribble inspired lines, and even paragraphs.  That doesn’t mean that I don’t have to eventually sit down for many hours at a time, day after day, to actually write the novel I promised. But I can also write it in bits and spurts.

But writing this particular, nonfiction, book requires a lot of research. The physical – driving all over in heavy Los Angeles traffic, checking if a building is still standing and in what sort of condition, who the neighbors are and how the neighborhood is looking.  But I also do research about any construction or new plans for the building in question and the surrounding area. Thank goodness for the internet – but I still have to find physical documents from in-person library and record-office visits as well. That is after I have investigated the entire history and Government records.

I’m still begging our local offices for more information on the upcoming Olympic Games to be played in Los Angeles in 2028 – just after my book comes out. No one seems to know where any of it is really happening. They tell me they ‘hope’ but are still not sure. So I have to get very creative to sound as if I have actual facts, locations and dates! Which I don’t! And I have to write in a timeless way so that the book, which is to be published in late 2027, is not out of date and does not sound as if I wrote it in 2026. It needs to be readable for years to come and not sound dated. If that makes any sense. 

That writing project has to be my main focus currently, as I have a publisher and a deadline.

But I’m also still fighting to save the Woman’s Club of Hollywood and have spent a lot of the past 3 years appearing in court, fighting off greedy people that suddenly decide that they should own the historic landmark property! I was even sued by one of them for trying to stop them claiming they own the property now. I have learned far more about the law than I ever wanted to. But I’ve also learned a lot of legal lingo and how attorneys and court officials write and speak. And how to make them listen and believe me. I just wish I could get inspired to write some legal drama – as a lot of writing has been involved. I have written copious ‘statements’ and ‘declarations,’ addressing dishonest or bizarre claims, cleaning up witness ramblings and creating documents that swiftly and cleanly explain the current situation, precluding any wiggle room for misinterpretation. Just the facts, ma’am!  It is a specialized form of writing.  But not enjoyable, other than the knowledge that I am fighting for justice for an historic landmark.

But I do snatch time for my fun writing, as I clear my head of the other ‘stuff.’ My fun writing rambles, but sometimes results in an unfinished short story, another chapter in my second Lottie Topaz book – as yet, unfinished. Writing is therapeutic. Sometimes I just write 3 or 4 pages of what may be an essay on something. Whenever I have the time, I shall go through these scribblings and decide if I think they’re worth publishing. I have a lot of unpublished writings!

It was good to escape to Greece again, as I always manage to clear my head while I am there, and decide what in my life and my writing is worth keeping and what needs to be discarded. I get surprising clarity.

It could be the sound of the ocean just yards away from where we stay. Or the serenity of the old house we rent, where every room has many windows, all with amazing views of treetops and the ocean, or mountains on the other side, or terracotta roofs amidst the endless olive trees, and that characteristic yellow brick of the local houses. Every room has a view. There are verandas that scream for writing time, and a small, tranquil garden. What’s not to like? The challenge is, when one does sit down to write there, is to not be lulled to sleep by the sound of the waves. Especially when this follows some wonderful Greek meal. So, the struggle is enormous.  And I noticed on so many occasions there, that when the house was quiet, my siblings were all reading – before they were lulled to sleep. Everyone got through several books while we were there. We always do.

So now it’s back to reality – and writing deadlines. But I’m grateful to have a deadline and a writing deal – after so many years of chasing publishers and literary agents. That agent bit never came to fruition. But my book writing did. And so, I write on. And as long as I can write – even if it just for my eyes – I am a happy camper.

ASSUMPTIONS, ASPIRATIONS AND ANNOYANCES

by Miko Johnston

While driving through a nearby town, I spotted the flashing lights of a half-dozen police cars ahead. One sat parallel to the driveway of an elementary school and the rest parked outside a housing complex across the street. My first thought caused my stomach to lurch – active shooter at the school! As I drove past the line of black and whites I saw two officers in the walkway leading into the complex and two young men kneeling on the ground, their hands clasped behind their heads. The police had been called about some mischief in one of the apartments. Whew. Nothing to do with the school. On reflection I recalled the police car parked in the school’s driveway did not block the entrance, as I’d expect if a threat existed there. I continued driving, but the incident stayed with me.

You can understand my assumption, given the frequency of events like I’d imagined, as well as the climate of violence and hostility in our country. All signs that led to my incorrect conclusion. But I hated that I automatically jumped to that conclusion because this really happened. Fact, not fiction.

I don’t mind being fooled or misled in fiction; in fact I enjoy it. The “aha!” moment of surprise when I learn the truth is part of the pleasure when I read, watch a tv series or a movie. I aspire to do the same in my fiction writing, with one exception. As an historical fiction author, I never mislead with history. The pleasure of fooling the reader, or being fooled, doesn’t extend to non-fiction, or at least, it shouldn’t.

I worked as a journalist at a television station during the eighties, when the golden era of news began its downward spiral. Until then we presented the news as information: what happened, where, to whom, and if we knew, why and how. Every story had to be verified by at least two independent sources before broadcasting it. Sometimes early reports would be inaccurate, especially in high-drama situations like hijackings, shootouts or terrorism, but we’d always update viewers with corrections.  We limited any opinions to PSAs – public service announcements – separate from the evening news.

I lost that job when I disagreed with the news director’s approach to a story: a man facing divorce and separation from his children was arrested when he hired a “hitman”  (an undercover policeman) to murder his wife. This occurred a few months after a Shiite Muslim man had hijacked an airplane. The suspect happened to be a Shiite, which had nothing to do with the story, but it dominated the lede. Sensationalism boosted ratings, and that became paramount as competition with other broadcast news sources grew.

When I read fiction, go to the movies or stream scripted series, I want entertainment, escape, or just to have some fun. That might include being misled or even tricked into thinking something “is” when it really isn’t. Unlike in real life, part of the enjoyment of a good mystery or suspenseful story, along with figuring out whodunnit, is the expectation that the bad deed rarely goes unpunished. Real life is messy and problems can’t always be solved by the end of the episode or the final chapters of the book. In non-fiction, documentaries and news, I prefer the facts straight up, with no embellishment or opinion. That’s become harder to find when I read the newspaper or switch on the nightly news. Journalists often blur the line between reporting and proselytizing. Too often, they unapologetically violate it. As the late NY senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, “You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.”

I’ve frequently riffed on Mark Twain’s quote about how fiction has to be believable even if it isn’t true, while non-fiction has to be true, even if it isn’t believable. Now I’m questioning whether that line still exists in present-day media.

We live in an era when the information we get may cause doubt as to its accuracy, in part because we witness or hear things that would defy believability on a daily basis. Situations that would have shocked us yesterday seem, if not normal, then normalized. How – or will – it change the way we view both fiction and non-fiction?  

Miko Johnston, a founding member of The Writers in Residence, is the author of the historical fiction series, “A Petal in the Wind”, as well as a contributor to several anthologies. Miko lives in Washington (the big one) with her rocket scientist husband. Contact her at mikojohnstonauthor@gmail.com

Fun Facts About the Revolutionary War You Didn’t Know

While I was researching my latest pet psychic mystery, Giddy Up for Murder, I discovered a few fun facts about the events surrounding the Revolutionary War that might change the way you remember these exciting events. 

For instance, how would you like your Stars and Stripes with six-pointed stars?

When a group of men including George Washington visited Betsy Ross to ask her to create a flag to represent our new country, Washington suggested the six-pointed star used by his Mason Lodge. Betsy showed the general how much easier it was to cut out a five-pointed star. So, our current flag may have come to us because the original seamstress was tired.

How do we know the story told by Betsy’s children is true? We don’t, but several factors support this version.

  • Several family members signed affidavits swearing her story was true.
  • Paperwork exists that shows the Ross’s did work for George Washington
  • Her late husband’s uncle was on the Flag Committee
  • On May 29, 1777, the Pennsylvania State Navy Board paid Betsy for making flags, and on June 14, 1777, Congress adopted the Stars and Stripes as our official national flag.

I’m going with yes, it’s true.

How about the story of Paul Revere shouting, “The British are coming! The British are coming!” True? Or false?

While Henry Wadsworth Longfellow made Paul famous in his 1860 poem “Paul Revere’s Ride,” in reality, our hero rode into the night with two other men, William Dawes, and Samuel Prescott. Paul was detained by a British patrol in Charleston, while Prescott made it to Concord.

“Listen, my children, and you will here

Of the midnight ride of Samuel Prescott,”

Admittedly, this does not rhyme, so I understand Longfellow’s creative choice.

Two other riders are rarely mentioned: Isreal Bissel and Sybil Ludington, but theirs is a story for another day.  

Much of the research an author does winds up in a file for possible future use. The Betsy Ross episode made it into my book; Paul Revere’s ride did not.

In Giddy Up for Murder, pet psychic Frankie Chandler attends a Revolutionary War reenactment. When a man dies, the only witness to what really took place is a horse with a vendetta against a person who could not possibly have committed the crime. 

If you’d like to check out the book, the preorder is available now. 

Learn more

So, while you’re celebrating America’s semiquincentennial this year, why not dig into the patriotic tales you remember from childhood. What you find may surprise you.

Material on Betsy Ross gathered from Historic Philadelphia, Inc. article “Did She or Didn’t She?”

Material on Paul Revere’s ride gathered from Constitutional Facts article “The Five Riders.”

A Take on Thoreau

by Jill Amadio

Yesterday I watched a three-hour TV documentary on Henry David Thoreau. The life of the writer, poet, essayist, photographer, and author of several books, including “Walden,” was laid out in phenomenal detail. His opinions, deep thoughts, and reflections later led me to realize, as I subsequently watched “Murder, She Wrote,” that I have no such thoughts. I rarely reflect on nature, as Thoreau did, although I appreciate and enjoy it tremendously when I look out my slider at the newly budding trees that look back at me. I greet them every morning, but unless there is a decent breeze to indicate some kind of response by shaking their leaves, they ignore my enthusiastic “hello, there!”

The longer I listened and watched the history of Thoreau’s output of 20 volumes, the more I came to realize that my own thoughts and reflections are quite shallow.

I have no profound insights to share with readers, no cutting-edge philosophy to present as my own, no Thoreau-style literary observations.

But all is not lost, I comforted myself. My brand new reflection after that three-hour devotion to one of America’s most revered writers (born 1817 in Concord, Massachusetts) is that it is acceptable to be shallow. I have quite a few friends I regard lovingly as shallow, at least by the way they write and demonstrate, by their talks with me.

Shallow is sometimes a reputation given to mystery writers who write solely to present a puzzle.  For this, they are to be celebrated and congratulated. Figuring out plots and sub-pots is, to my mind, quite an exercise in innovation, subtlety, at least a partial knowledge of forensics and weaponry, and, above all, a good grasp of human behavior. Yet these attributes and talents are not always appreciated.

Writers are urged to observe people in cafes, employees and bosses at work, and various situations that can provide grist for the mill.

A couple of blank faces stared back at me in my writing class last week when I talked about this, one of my favorite idioms. Grist for the mill that can provide an overwhelming preponderance of research we can’t use, or exactly the clue we are seeking to complete the puzzle.

I think that shallow thoughts are a gift. They prevent us from digging too deeply into a subject, wasting precious writing time on too much information.  Shallow thoughts, however, can become too simplistic when we write ridiculous plots and create absurd characters.

On the other hand, an advantage of shallowness is a sense of freedom that comes with writing whatever we like and to heck with traditional publishers. Hail Amazon’s KDP!

Admittedly, several books published on their site are a waste of money, but they can serve as a lesson in what not to create.

I have not heard the word “shallow” spoken anywhere, perhaps never, not even with regard to the ocean or swimming pools. Yet to my mind, the word sounds exactly like the condition it is describing: of little depth.

I am not offended by my shallowness. It affords a certain caché to a sentence when written for all levels of readers, especially foreigners.

Another writing exercise I sometimes enjoy is substituting “shallow” for a word, turning a sentence into a conundrum that requires more thought than originally written, simply by considering the replacement.

I read that Thoreau advocated abandoning waste and illusion to discover life’s true essential needs. I’m not quite sure what that all means, but it is probably extremely profound. A writer’s needs are, I am sure, infinitesimal compared to those of the great writer when he wrote in longhand, while we have the luxury of laptops.

Thoreau died in 1861 at the age of 44, but his wide-ranging output and influence spanned abolitionism, civil disobedience, and world figures, including Mahatma Gandhi, Tolstoy, and Martin Luther King. All I seem to influence is my neighbor’s Beagle when it wants a treat.

Among my shallow thoughts are those of finances. How would I ever be able to afford the clothes with which to meet King Charles III, George Clooney, or Ralph Lauren?  My shoe collection has dwindled to a few flat Mary Janes, and all my heels have gone to Goodwill.

Whither my latest mystery? Awaiting a bolt from the blue, or at the very least, a few shallow thoughts with which to proceed.

Redundancies and Series: How to Make Both Work.

by Jackie Houchin

A couple of weeks ago, Gayle shared with us about repeats and redundancies in our writing and how to avoid them. This is only one of the points she’s taught to keep our writing enticing and enjoyable for our readers. She used the TV show, Murder, She Wrote, to illustrate both the allowed and the frowned-upon redundancies.

“TV series like book series need formulas to stay consistent,” one person commented. “It’s why we keep going back.”

On the same note, I love books in a series.  When I find a well-written and fun series, I will begin with the first installment, read right through to the last, and then hope there will be more to come. They have the same main characters (which I’ve grown to love) and the plots, although varied, follow a basic plan each time. The settings can be here and there, I don’t care.

(Oops!  Yes, I know that for some readers, the PLACE where the series happens is the ‘sweet spot,’ as in outer space, a certain beloved city, or on a cruise ship. It’s why they keep returning for book after book. Sorry!)

Anyway, in a series, I know what to expect, even though I don’t know what to expect, if you get my meaning.

…

One series I enjoy is Canadian author Iona Whishaw’s Lane Winslow Mysteries. They are set in British Columbia (with a few side excursions) shortly after WWII. Lane was a British spy during the war, and she uses her “secret” skills to help the local police inspector solve crimes.

The author has written 13 installments, so far, with a little prequel thrown in.  I’ve read all but the last, and have just purchased it. It’s a series that can keep going with the same characters and slightly altered plots.

…

I have also enjoyed Gabrielle Meyer’s Timeless series, which combines mystery, light romance, and history across a dozen settings and eras. She uses a “time-crosser” or two in each book. These gals (and sometimes guys) are in one of two settings every other day until they turn 25. At that point, they must choose the one they wish to remain in.

While the plot is essentially the same (a choice between two lives, weighing the costs and benefits of each), the era and places, along with the wonderfully researched history, make each book different. They do not follow one another chronologically, like the Lane Winslow Mysteries.  It’s a series that can continue as long as the author wants, but each story stands alone. They repeat only in form.

…

The other series that hooked me was Ashley Weaver’s Electra McDonnell Mysteries. In these, Electra is a skilled safecracker from a family of thieves who is coerced into working for British Intelligence to avoid prison. Of course, a handsome Major is her handler. Sparks happen, but she is SO “not fitting” for a high-born Brit. Very exciting, suspenseful, and FUN. 

The books in this series follow a close chronological order and have a natural ending in book five.  If I want to read more in this series, I will have to re-read from book one.

…

Where was I? I guess I segued from redundancies, repeats, and formulas to book series. But these examples show that YOU can write a short or long series that grabs and holds your readers without resorting to boring repetition or copycats.

(And for my faux pas about setting, there IS a series I love set on the cruise ship, Siren of the Seas.  It’s Hope Callighan’s Millie’s Cruise Ship Mysteries.  Set aboard a luxury cruise ship, now as familiar as my own house, or at a port o’ call, the books feature recurring characters and similar plots. The story advances chronologically with each book, and there are multiple dozens of books in the series.)

I’d love your comments on the book series you love (and why you love them – characters, settings, plots?).  I have hundreds more I couldn’t list.  Let’s compare!!

Cats in Mysteries

by Maggie King

Want to make a good mystery even better? Add a cat.

Seriously.

Many mystery series feature feline companions. The most famous one is The Cat Who … series, created by the late Lilian Jackson Braun. The stories feature reporter Jim Qwilleran and his Siamese cats, Kao K’o-Kung (Koko for short) and Yum Yum. Koko has a “sixth sense” that gives him stellar powers of detection.

Shirley Rousseau Murphy also anthropomorphizes her feline detective, Joe Grey, P.I. I was on an Alaskan cruise a few years back and borrowed Cat Pay the Devil from the ship’s library. I had to return the book when the cruise ended but purchased a copy as soon as I got home. It’s a truly charming series.
Midnight Louie is the late Carole Nelson Douglas’s feline super sleuth. Rita Mae Brown’s Mrs. Murphy even speaks. I loved Jennifer J. Chow’s Sassy Cat Mystery Series, and was sad when she didn’t continue it.

Some cats leave the detecting to their human companions. Lydia Adamson, Susan Wittig Albert, Linda Palmer, Gillian Roberts, and Rosemary Stevens are just a few of the authors who feature cats as “window dressing.” Often literally, as cats like to perch on window ledges, watching the world go by.

Just as my Olive stole my heart, she also stole the heart of Hazel Rose, the title sleuth in my Hazel Rose Book Group series. Shammy, Daisy, and Morris, now enjoying eternity together across the rainbow bridge, live on in my series. They don’t detect (Olive hunts down mice and voles, but shies away from killers).

I haven’t forgotten our canine friends–Linda wouldn’t forgive me if i did! The Robbins Library in Arlington, Massachusetts features an impressive list of mysteries with pets, cats AND dogs.

The cats of my life. Top: Marie, Shammy, Daisy; Bottom: Olive, Morris

Originally published in 2018 on the now defunct Pets, Paws, and Claws blog.

PART 3 – Always Ask Yourself

                                Does it advance the story?

                                Does it enhance the story?

                                Is it redundant?

Writers find ways to advance their story by dropping new bits of information or enhancing the story by giving a terrific description of a person, place or thing, but do they ever check to see if they visited the same place too many times or discussed the same bit of business in their story with way too many other characters?  When that happens too often it starts feeling like the writer ran out of material and is just filling up a few blank pages.

In the old Murder She Wrote episodes, good ol’ Jessica Fletcher would drop a clue early on during any given episode only to remember that incident later and realize it was, indeed, a clue to the killer. Now you might call that procedure “redundant” since it happened in every episode, but if you were a fan and watched a lot of the re-runs you would probably be looking for those hints at the beginning of the show and see if you can catch the clue before Jessica does.

I’ve been watching the old episodes and actually watch for those subtle hints so I can beat Jessica to the killer.  They do a good job having all the actors in any given episode give subtle looks that might indicate they are the bad guy, but since all of the actors do it, you have to pay closer attention to what each person says both before and after the killing. But they seldom trudge over the same clue or drag in the same person more than once. Therefore, there is no redundancy as such.

As for what a writer should do, unless you’re writing a TV series where every episode is a carbon copy of the previous one, don’t keep throwing out the same bits of information. Figure a way to move the story along with something innovative like a new character or take the main characters in a different direction even if it’s a dead end. That’s a better use of those words you’re putting on paper.

Even redundancies as simple as having all the conversations happen around the same dinner table or office desk or even the neighborhood bar or restaurant gets old. Maybe try taking your characters for a walk in the woods or for a drive in the country. The fresh air or different scenery will be a nice background for new revelations.

Even if the characters are trapped in a cabin in the woods during a snowstorm, let the people find a quiet corner, or the sofa in front of the fireplace, or maybe have your characters climb a ladder up to the attic for some quiet conversation. Just don’t have them constantly returning to the same place. As they say: “Been there. Done that.”

Your goal isn’t to say the same thing in half a dozen different ways. It’s to say new stuff. See new things. Meet new characters. Say new stuff…See new things…Meet new characters…Say new stuff…See new things…Meet new characters…

Remember the point of this post: Don’t repeat yourself.  Write On!

Topics

by Linda Johnston

Hey, I’m up again this week at The Writers in Residence. So what’s my blog topic? Blog Topics!

How do we decide on what topics to write about in our blogs? Well, we’re all writers, and we write about sometimes similar but always different things related to writing and reading. As I was trying to determine what to write about this week, I checked on my own most recent topics as well as those of my fellow Writers in Residence.

Some of my most recent involved how fast we write, and events around us that stimulate our writing. Some of my fellow WinR authors wrote about books (of course), book events, dream jobs, including writing, paper that we use to write, and otherwise, favorite phrases, favorite seasons to write…and more.

The common thread is, of course, our writing and that of others that we enjoy reading. How to decide on the topic to write about? Read, study, consider possibilities—then do it.

One of my favorite topics is dogs, but I can’t always write about them. I do so whenever I can, though. Like here. I just got to mention dogs!

So, what will be the topic of my next blog here? Something related to writing, but I still have to ponder what.