Hello, chaps.
Bethany from Ramblings of a Young Author tagged me in with the Top Ten Most Influential Books tag, so here's my list, in no particular order.
1. Embassy by S. Alex Martin.
This one is free this weekend on Amazon, which is why I put it first on the list. Go download it. It's fun.
I started reading Embassy last summer when Mr. Martin put out a request for beta readers on the Go Teen Writers Facebook group. I'd been thinking about reading someone else's story at the time since my dad and I had recently talked about critique partners, so I thought, "Why not? He only wants someone to read the first chapter, I'll give it a go." Three other readers and I worked with him over the next several months as he polished and polished and then published it. The book itself didn't influence me much (though it is a good book and I did enjoy it) but the process of working with Mr. Martin and the other betas was hugely influential and I loved it. So, go download Embassy while it's free. Read it! Enjoy it! Find my name in the acknowledgements!
2. The Harry Potter books by J. K. Rowling.
When my parents read me the first one when I was little, I thought "I want to write books like J. K. Rowling does!" Did I write any stories then? No. (Though for a while I told my sister bedtime stories every night.) Writing was for the future, and why worry about that when there were imaginary friends to play with? I didn't really start writing until I tried to get out of writing a book report by writing a story instead. I think I was about twelve. Mom didn't go for that, but I kept writing that story anyway. That awful thing was the inspiration for my first, awful novel.
3. The Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede.
Dealing with Dragons and the following books were the first fantasies I truly fell in love with. I've read the whole series at least twice, and plan on reading them again someday.
4. The Trixie Belden books by Julie Campbell and Kathryn Kenny
My mom bought all but four of the Trixie books while she was growing up (34 total), and my dad read all of them out loud to my sister and I. (He read out loud to us every night for YEARS.) They are falling apart, especially the oldest ones, but I loved them and they fostered my love of mysteries. Same can be said for The Boxcar Children books.
5. The Hank the Cowdog books by John R. Erickson
These are some of the funniest books I've ever read. Or, listened to. The author reads the audiobooks and sings all of Hank's funny songs, and they are fantastic. Like plastic. (Bonus points if you get that reference.) Many a long car trip or day helping my dad at work was spent listening to Hank.
6. All the Shakespeare I read in middle school.
Gotta love the Bard and his poetic, if sometimes practically indecipherable dialogue. I know, technically these are plays and not books, but whatever.
7 and 8. Little Dorrit and Bleak House by Charles Dickens
Little Dorrit is actually the only Dickens I've read, but I've seen the TV miniseries for each a couple times, so I know the stories. As I've said before, I love the complexity of the plots and the characters and how everything ties in at the end.
9. Mistborn by Brandon Sanderson
I read the Mistborn series last summer, and was blown away by the characters and the plotting. Yes, the books are sometimes creepy and bloody and gruesome but they are AMAZING. I'm thinking about dressing up as Vin for Halloween. Mr. Sanderson was the first author in recent memory to do something I usually dislike in a story and make me love it anyway.
10. The textbooks I've read over the years, especially the science ones and my American government book.
Call me a nerd if you want, because I am one. These books have taught me so much and helped me understand the world better and write better. Pretty much the only reason I read the gov book after that class was cancelled is because I knew I'd be able to apply what I learned to worldbuilding governments. (And I was so right.)
Other books worthy of mention, because top ten just doesn't cover it: almost anything by Dr. Seuss, Eragon and following books by Christopher Paolini, the Bible, Laddie by Gene Stratton-Porter, Gone-Away Lake by Elizabeth Enright, The Blood of Kings series by Jill Williamson, and all that poetry Mom made me read in middle school.
I'm not going to tag anyone specifically, so if you want to participate in the tag, go for it! Or feel free to tell me about some of the books that have influenced you in a comment.
Showing posts with label Shakespeare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Shakespeare. Show all posts
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Friday, April 26, 2013
Character Question: What is Love?
Yeah, I know that's a weird title. Allow me to explain.
Last night, I was watching Lark Rise to Candleford (a really great period drama TV show that any Austen/Gaskell fans should check out) and the conflict for one of the characters was the question above. What is love? She was kinda freaking out about it. Anyway, when she asked that question the first time, one of my characters answered her in my head. "Love is giving your life for someone else's." Now, this doesn't fit the Lark Rise episode in any way, shape, or form, but I was intrigued. Viola, my character, answered what love is to her. So, I decided to see what some of my other characters had to say.
Marius: Love is accepting/loving someone despite their past.
Bev: Love is being accepted for who you are.
Joy: .... Is this a trick question?
Silla: Love is being accepted, even when you're not what was wanted.
Gwen: Love is working hard for the good of others.
Chad: See Shakespeare's sonnet 116. I painted it on the side of the abandoned crematorium.
Farold: Love is protecting your loved ones from the past.
Henley Sayer: Love is avenging your family.
Lizzie: Ooh, I should ask my characters that....
I'm not sure some of these even make sense, but I thought it was interesting to see how differently the characters reacted. And thank heaven they reacted differently, or I would have some serious character development to do for everybody.
As you may or may not be able to see, some of these characters have insecurities that affect their view of this subject (Marius, Bev, Silla...). Hopefully, that makes them more like chocolate lava cakes and less like cardboard.
If you're a writer (and I assume most of my few readers are), how did your characters react to this question? And I'd love to hear input from all the non-writers too.
A good evening/morning/day/whatever to you.
Last night, I was watching Lark Rise to Candleford (a really great period drama TV show that any Austen/Gaskell fans should check out) and the conflict for one of the characters was the question above. What is love? She was kinda freaking out about it. Anyway, when she asked that question the first time, one of my characters answered her in my head. "Love is giving your life for someone else's." Now, this doesn't fit the Lark Rise episode in any way, shape, or form, but I was intrigued. Viola, my character, answered what love is to her. So, I decided to see what some of my other characters had to say.
Marius: Love is accepting/loving someone despite their past.
Bev: Love is being accepted for who you are.
Joy: .... Is this a trick question?
Silla: Love is being accepted, even when you're not what was wanted.
Gwen: Love is working hard for the good of others.
Chad: See Shakespeare's sonnet 116. I painted it on the side of the abandoned crematorium.
Farold: Love is protecting your loved ones from the past.
Henley Sayer: Love is avenging your family.
Lizzie: Ooh, I should ask my characters that....
I'm not sure some of these even make sense, but I thought it was interesting to see how differently the characters reacted. And thank heaven they reacted differently, or I would have some serious character development to do for everybody.
As you may or may not be able to see, some of these characters have insecurities that affect their view of this subject (Marius, Bev, Silla...). Hopefully, that makes them more like chocolate lava cakes and less like cardboard.
If you're a writer (and I assume most of my few readers are), how did your characters react to this question? And I'd love to hear input from all the non-writers too.
A good evening/morning/day/whatever to you.
Saturday, April 7, 2012
An Introduction to My Writing Insanity
A good prompt indeed!
Well, during NaNoWriMo I always wore a pair of greyish wool fingerless gloves that my mom made. They're cool because they have cables on them. Cables are cool. I wore them 'cause they kept my hands warm and kept tendonitis at bay (mostly), but they looked good too.
Something I do on a regular basis is talk to myself. Or, rather, my characters talk to me through me. That sounds a bit bonkers, but 'tis none the less true. Letting them borrow my voice gives me insight as to how they would say something. It may be something as simple as "My name is Viola" (that one's been going through my head A LOT lately) or an entire monologue. It's like I can hear them say it. The tone they use, the voice inflections, the sarcasm, the smile that comes from their words as well as their facial muscles, the disgust, etc. It makes me look crazy, but the strange looks are worth the payoff. Of course sometimes I start talking to myself without realizing it or using the hand motions my character is using, which can get a bit awkward.
Sometimes I act out the scene that's going through my head. This can be weird, since about half the time I do it without realizing it. I'll be plunging a dagger at a bad guy when I realize that my fist kinda hurts from hitting the sheet cabinet (the "bad guy") a little too hard. Or swinging a cheese grater around like a sword only to turn and see my sister giving me a weird look. Yes, I turn cheese graters into swords. I've turned just about every kitchen utensil my family has into a weapon of some kind. It's quite fun.
A habit I just recently discovered I had is to open a story with a bit of back story. This one can be a bit problematic, since the current trend is to start in the middle of the action. We'll see how that turns out. I may just have to find clever ways of employing the use of a prologue.
Something else I just noticed is that lately I have a thing for redheaded warrior princess type characters. Weird huh?
Another thing I like to do is to mash two things that don't usually go together together and give them to a character as a quirk. Like Shakespeare and spray paint. Or wearing purple Goth style clothes and playing lead guitar in a country band. Yes, I've done both of those, and they're some of my favorite characters.
Well, I think that's enough of my brain for you today. Be sure to visit the gift shop and come back soon!
Here's a map of the blog chain, day by day:
(Sorry about the white background. The BFDs [Blogger Formatting Demons] have done something weird)
April 5– http://correctingpenswelcome.wordpress.com–Comfy
Sweaters, Writing, and Fish
April 6– http://towerofplot.blogspot.com —
The Leaning Tower of Plot
April 7–http://lilyjenness.blogspot.com–Lily’s
Notes in the Margins. YOU ARE HERE!
April 8–http://weirdalocity.wordpress.com–
From My Head
April 9–http://insideliamsbrain.wordpress.com–This
Page Intentionally Left Blank
April 10–http://thewordasylum.wordpress.com–The
Word Asylum
April 11–http://rachelsbookreviews.com–Rachel’s
Book Reviews
April 12–http://noveljourneys.wordpress.com–Novel
Journeys
April 13–http://delorfinde.wordpress.com–A
Farewell to Sanity
April 14–http://swordofink.com–Sword of Ink
April 15–http://thedreamersadventures.blogspot.com–The
Dreamers Adventures
April 16–http://incessantdroningofaboredwriter.wordpress.com–The
Incessant Droning of a Bored Writer
April 17–http://herestous.wordpress.com–Here’s
To Us
April 18–http://teenscanwritetoo.wordpress.com–Teens
Can Write Too! (We will be announcing the topic for next month’s chain)
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Mom! Lily's Gone All Shakespeare Again!
Beware! My readers dearest, for last night I did watch an insult to the great name of the Bard, and now am inclined and find it within my power to to blog-rant about it. By these warning words I declare that this post shall be written in as close a proximity to the language of the great William Shakespeare as this writer can pull from the heart and put into a mostly grammatical fashion. Also! within these scrambled scribblings will you find the great rant monster, for 'tis he hath lead me to this blank page for the purpose of letting said monster and all vexations as to the inferiority of such a visual recording loose into the blogosphere! I fear too, dear friends that contained within the walls of this little snow-like composition editor, I shall be inclined to use marks of exclamation so much as to defy rational thought. Bear with me, and know the suffering of the play known as The Tempest was horrendous, and shortly you shall see that a slaughtering such as that I had to bear last even' was worthy of exclamation points so many!
The first fault I shall fill with the pudding of disgusted prose is that of the wind spirit, Ariel. The director of this twice brine-dipped farce introduced our mischi'vous spirit as coming from a pool of water. This, as I dost remember from the bare script o' the play, is false. Remember that defining adjective and magical noun pair from the first sentence of this paragraph; "wind spirit". Though 'tis possible our Ariel could preform such a feat, I find it in error. As to the rest of Ariel's performance, it stank with the fetid smell of long dead fish. I did not find the actor's acting appealing. And, to worsen the picture, each time did this apparition appear, the makers of the visual recording did apply too liberally the use of computer graphics most appalling and of a kaleidoscopic nature that did clash with the setting of the play.
The next target of my ridicule is the music. The first scene which did use the atrocious music was indeed the worst. It combined the use of electrically powered guitar music and the awful graphics in the scene where Ariel did pour vengeance in fiery form onto the ship of the traitorous Antonio. The music afterwards was almost as revolting, using modern instruments that felt divorced from the heart of the play.
The costumes, though more subtly ill fitting, were disappointing and beyond what I consider inappropriate for such a story. Zippers were the main cause of my excessive eye-lolling. Zippers? Truly? And this be a recording t'was nominated for a best costume award of some kind! Let me clarify myself as to the usage of zippers: the zipping closures were only used for decorative purposes, and seemed to have no true function! As you may see wearers of "Gothic" clothing brandishing on their persons today. 'Twas most stupid I tell you, most stupid indeed.
One last remark before I return to sanity. The prince, Ferdinand, betwixt whose ears did lie a desert barren, lacked most completely the vocal charms that were required to serenade the lovely Miranda, and when he ope'd his lips did issue forth a song that would make wolves cover their ears! 'Twas ridiculous, and did only make more child-like his appearance.
The makers of this moving picture I believe made a fatal error in trying to combine the classic charm of the Bard's immortal work with the troll vomit they call "modern" elements. I do not object to taking the bare bones o' the story and creating a modern twist set in a modern time, providing it be not too far removed and make not fun of the original, but to keep a play in its original setting and then to force upon it these "modern" elements with which it doth clash 'tis most appalling, and doth nothing good to the reputation of the creators. Acclaimed this picture may be, but only by those who see not the original for its genius and find the "modern" items appealing to their warped taste.
Ah, I find my soul much relieved. If you have waded thus far through my rantings and slanderings of those who reside in Hollywood, I urge you to view this retelling of the classic tale "The Three Little Pigs", told in this most wonderful form of English. I find it quite amusing.
Now go forth and enjoy this day! May the wind be at you back, and chocolate always within your reach.
The first fault I shall fill with the pudding of disgusted prose is that of the wind spirit, Ariel. The director of this twice brine-dipped farce introduced our mischi'vous spirit as coming from a pool of water. This, as I dost remember from the bare script o' the play, is false. Remember that defining adjective and magical noun pair from the first sentence of this paragraph; "wind spirit". Though 'tis possible our Ariel could preform such a feat, I find it in error. As to the rest of Ariel's performance, it stank with the fetid smell of long dead fish. I did not find the actor's acting appealing. And, to worsen the picture, each time did this apparition appear, the makers of the visual recording did apply too liberally the use of computer graphics most appalling and of a kaleidoscopic nature that did clash with the setting of the play.
The next target of my ridicule is the music. The first scene which did use the atrocious music was indeed the worst. It combined the use of electrically powered guitar music and the awful graphics in the scene where Ariel did pour vengeance in fiery form onto the ship of the traitorous Antonio. The music afterwards was almost as revolting, using modern instruments that felt divorced from the heart of the play.
The costumes, though more subtly ill fitting, were disappointing and beyond what I consider inappropriate for such a story. Zippers were the main cause of my excessive eye-lolling. Zippers? Truly? And this be a recording t'was nominated for a best costume award of some kind! Let me clarify myself as to the usage of zippers: the zipping closures were only used for decorative purposes, and seemed to have no true function! As you may see wearers of "Gothic" clothing brandishing on their persons today. 'Twas most stupid I tell you, most stupid indeed.
One last remark before I return to sanity. The prince, Ferdinand, betwixt whose ears did lie a desert barren, lacked most completely the vocal charms that were required to serenade the lovely Miranda, and when he ope'd his lips did issue forth a song that would make wolves cover their ears! 'Twas ridiculous, and did only make more child-like his appearance.
The makers of this moving picture I believe made a fatal error in trying to combine the classic charm of the Bard's immortal work with the troll vomit they call "modern" elements. I do not object to taking the bare bones o' the story and creating a modern twist set in a modern time, providing it be not too far removed and make not fun of the original, but to keep a play in its original setting and then to force upon it these "modern" elements with which it doth clash 'tis most appalling, and doth nothing good to the reputation of the creators. Acclaimed this picture may be, but only by those who see not the original for its genius and find the "modern" items appealing to their warped taste.
Ah, I find my soul much relieved. If you have waded thus far through my rantings and slanderings of those who reside in Hollywood, I urge you to view this retelling of the classic tale "The Three Little Pigs", told in this most wonderful form of English. I find it quite amusing.
Now go forth and enjoy this day! May the wind be at you back, and chocolate always within your reach.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)