The Author Speaks:  All My Original Writing Content

For your convenience, a masterpost of all (or most) of my original posts so far.  It will obviously be updated as I create and add more!

Enjoy, and thank you for reading!  <3

The Basics:  Plotting, Descriptions, and More

The Dos and Don’ts of Beginning a Novel (9/27/2017)

How to Write Good Dialogue (7/27/2017)

Notes on Chapters (7/5/2020)

My Top Tips for Sticking to That Damn WIP (8/13/2020)

How to Avoid Purple Prose (7/14/2017)

The Objective Correlative (4/10/2019)

Tips for Visual Thinkers (6/29/2017)

5 Ways to Name Your Novel (8/11/2018)

Romance

How to Write a Kiss Scene (9/17/2017)

How to Write a (Healthy) Romance (6/17/2017)

Mythology 

Irish Mythology Resources (4/4/2019)

Academia

Masterpost for Writing Academic Essays (9/25/2020)

Horror

My #1 Tip For Writing Horror (5/17/2019)

Monster of the Week

Werewolves (10/19/2020)

Vampires (10/7/2020)

The Undead (10/23/2020)

Characterization

How to Get to Know Your Characters (6/17/2017)

Male Protagonists to Avoid in Your Writing (5/28/2017)

Female Protagonists to Avoid in Your Writing (6/7/2017)

More Female Protagonists to Avoid in Your Writing (6/5/2019)

The Importance of Antiheroes (6/22/2020)

How to Write Strong Female Characters (3/24/2018)

The Many Faces of the Strong Female Character (7/10/2019)

The Traits of a Likable Hero (7/19/2017)

The Secret to a Relatable Villain (3/11/2018)

Types of Unreliable Narrators (7/1/2019)

How to Write (or Avoid) Abusive Parents (8/2/2017)

The Dos and Don’ts of Writing Smart Characters (1/20/2020)

My Published Fiction:

Gentlefolk - A timid woman faces her deepest fears in order to try and reclaim her stolen child from charismatic local Nature Gods. Only to discover that everything she’s been taught about them might be wrong. Published August 10, 2020.

The New Gods - Society is populated by gods, new and old. Some are more frightening than others. Published February 11, 2020.

Gunpowder Sigil - In a windblown Western town, a young girl conducts a summoning ritual for a spectral gunslinger. Magical realism meets the Western. Published August 4, 2019.

The Undertaker’s Apprentice - A lovesick undertaker in training goes on a disastrous first date, with a corpse as a third wheel. Published December 6, 2018.

The Young Immortal - A relatively youthful member of the immortal community reflects on his first century of life and his relationship with his oft-reincarnated soulmate. Published December 21, 2018.

The Bear - An anxiety-ridden young man with a talent for avoiding his problems decides not to acknowledge the grizzly bear trapped in his bedroom during a busy a day. Published October 1, 2018.

Stitches - Featured in Volume Blue of the anthology series Dark Cheer: Cryptids Emerging. A son comes finds purpose outside of his father’s legacy.  Published December 28, 2021.

Nemesis - The third story featured in the anthology, Things Improbable.  A lovesick supervillain is confronted by what they will do for their beloved superhero. Publishing February 28, 2023.

Strange New Worlds Anthology - A compilation of my short fiction, including previously published and previously unseen works.  Release date to be determined.

Happy writing, everybody!

New publication alert! Check out my story "Out of This World," published by Defenestration Magazine. About bridezillas, wedding culture, baking, and dreams of space.

A preview here:

Read it in full here!

The American Association of Liars

New publication alert! Check out my latest published flash fiction, about a compulsive liar and the lies people tell in relationships.

New publication alert! My flash fiction, "The Woman in the Jar," is featured on page five of the Aureation literary zine.

Tons of great writing and artworks in this issue, and it's tiny enough to read in one sitting.

I hope everyone had a great Easter!

I'm so glad! That makes my day to hear.

Note: I was much younger when I wrote that, and if I wrote it today, I would put way more emphasis on the fact that any of those character archetypes can work if they're written better and more interestingly.

I THINK I alluded to that in the original posts, and I stand by most of the points I made, but now I'm much more focused on improving writing rather than avoiding certain things.

Perhaps I'll make updated versions one of these days!

In the meantime, happy writing!

I agree, everyone should write what they want! It is ultimately an act of passion, and everyone has total creative liberty over what they produce.

However, not all writing is intended to be interacted with the same way.

A work of fanfiction or an original story that someone shares for free is different, for example, than a book you have to buy or a film you have to pay to watch. The purpose of reviews for products are not just to support the author, but to guide other prospective readers and viewers about how they'll spend their money and time.

As an author, there's also a difference between a hobbyist and a professional. I'm both! I write for fun, and I've published writing for money. I also have an MFA in Creative Writing.

I would consider it rude if someone offered unsolicited criticism of writing or art I made available for free, but when a paying publisher accepts my stories, I expect them to offer edits to make it as good as it can be for the consumption of the public.

Similarly, if I were in a critique session with my MFA peers, I'd be annoyed if they told me to just have fun without offering any other feedback. As you can see, the context changes whether writing is appropriate to criticize, and whether criticisms should be expected.

Hollywood studios should also be held to an especially high standard, I think, because of the amount of money that is channeled into funding their films, and the amount of money they charge from the public.

Now, about the term Mary Sue.

Many already know that "Mary Sue" is a satirical term, originating in a parody fanfiction from a Star Trek fan magazine, and I don't think it was ever meant to be treated as a serious literary criticism. There's also a male equivalent - the Gary Stu - but it's seldom used, and the term remains disproportionately geared towards female characters.

I don't dislike characters because they're "Mary Sues," I dislike characters because they're poorly written. And I have a pet peeve when a portion of the internet reactively claims a character is well-written simply to defend them from accusations of being a Mary Sue.

Again, this is usually in regards to big budget Hollywood movies or shows, like Captain Marvel, the 2016 Ghostbusters, She-Hulk, or what have you. The criticisms against these movies were often bad, and came from misogynistic viewpoints - but that doesn't mean these movies and shows are good. And I would have been doing myself a disservice if I overlooked their flaws simply because misogynists also didn't like them.

I think Hollywood studios often hide behind superficially strong female characters to shield themselves from criticism, and avoid having to write female characters who are actually original, complex, and interesting.

(Again, this is all just my opinion. Anyone is welcome to like the above properties! I like tons of things that could be considered questionable.)

So, to conclude: yes, everyone deserves to have fun with writing! It is usually inappropriate and rude to offer unsolicited criticism of art that is available for free. But Hollywood films and traditionally published writing that we pay money to access are not the same as free art that's shared only for passion and fun.

And last but not least, calling a character a Mary Sue is usually a stupid criticism, but not every character who is accused of being a Mary Sue is a good character!

Just my thoughts on the matter, which I'm obviously more than eager to babble about for a good half hour.

Touché!

To clarify, I have the same issues with Wonder Woman when Wonder Woman is badly written! There are plenty of writers who incompetently handle her (case in point, the DCEU sequel, though there are many more).

I do recall that there was a BIG influx of discourse about whether Rey was a "Mary Sue" around the time the Force Awakens came out, and it seemed to be replaced with other discourse in the subsequent movies (mostly regarding her dynamic with Kylo). So I agree you may be on to something there, though I also can't remember that time all that clearly!

And of course! In fact, I'd wager MOST of us like characters who have been badly written. Often this is because characters in a lot of major franchises have a lot of writers (and directors and producers) who vary wildly in their handling of those characters. So characters can have great moments where their appeal is really apparent, and then the rest of the franchise can completely squander it.

Despite my criticism, I actually like Rey and most of the other sequel trilogy characters -- I think they each had a lot of potential at the start, and there are elements of the sequel trilogy that I liked, even though I don't think the writers handled it cohesively as a whole.

I don't know if this makes sense, but I don't blame characters for being badly written. It's the writer who failed to make full use of their potential. And I love seeing fans make use of this potential in their own artworks!

Hello there!

As someone who grew up with a lot of Wonder Woman content, I have to personally disagree!

Like any major superhero, Wonder Woman gets a lot of good content and plenty of bad content, too.

Yes, she's idealized - but almost all superheroes are idealized. Superman is literally a mirror of the philosophical concept of the "Ubermensch," a term coined by Nietzsche meaning "superman" and describing an ideal human being. By this standard, he could also be described as a Mary Sue!

But just being beautiful, powerful, and good does not a Mary Sue make. These idyllic superheroes work well when they're put in circumstances that challenge them. It's fascinating to see characters that seemingly embody the highest reaches of human potential pushed to their limits, when we see that they too have flaws and weaknesses that they can overcome through perseverance.

You say that she "never struggles," but a good Wonder Woman writer knows that she NEEDS to struggle to be interesting. In shows like the animated Justice League and Justice League Unlimited, she and all the other major heroes are put in situations that challenge them on every level - physical (like fighting literal gods) and emotional (being banished from her home for bringing men to the island).

And also funny scenarios that put them at disadvantages, like being turned into children or a pig that then must be chased through the city by Batman (yes, both real episodes) that humanize them and show that they're not invulnerable.

For the more recent, live action movies, I liked the first Wonder Woman but not the second. I personally liked the fact that she was excited to see a baby, especially in the context that there were no babies on her island, because women are often expected to reject feminine characteristics to be strong.

I see your point, but I also have a different view regarding children: I think a lot of the oppression experienced by women is also experienced by children, and children are frequently dehumanized.

Not everyone who says they don't like kids is a bad person - I know plenty of great people who say they don't like kids - but I'm not really comfortable with the concept of disliking an entire group of human beings. Children have such varied personalities, just like any other group.

Granted, most people who say they don't like kids don't mean they dislike ALL kids, but it's still a sentiment I don't really like from a cultural standpoint.

As for women who don't WANT kids, I agree - it's deeply messed up that many people don't see women as complete or fulfilled unless they have kids. But (though it's been a while since I've seen it) I don't recall Wonder Woman in the 2017 movies planning to have children of her own. Plenty of women like children without intending to have them, myself included.

Again, though, I do see your point that the writers may have been trying to soften Wonder Woman in the eyes of the audience by having her love babies.

I still prefer that over the original Joss Whedon script, where a little girl at one point asks her to get a cat down from a tree (I think. Perhaps it was a lost toy) and Wonder Woman callously tells her to get it herself. To me, that plays into a sexist stereotype that women must reject all feminine attributes in order to be strong.

The sequel film, on the other hand, really embodies how NOT to write Wonder Woman in every way: largely exempt from moral criticism, inherently better than those around her, and with few meaningful challenges that aren't solved through plot convenience. She isn't "always right," however, because another flaw in that film's plot is the fact that she's learning a vague and contrived lesson of not cheating to get what she wants, though that's never explored in any way that feels human or applicable.

To conclude, I'll reiterate -- and this is just my opinion -- Wonder Woman is done GREAT when written by someone who understands the appeal of the character. Her idyllic characteristics apply to most superheroes, and can work great if the person writing her knows how to challenge her. I don't mind when she has feminine characteristics, and I love when all superheroes love kids, male and female. And last but not least, Justice League and Justice League unlimited reign supreme in terms of superhero content.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to ramble and spill my potentially controversial opinions!

Thank you! My feelings are a little mixed that something I wrote when I was a teenager is still circulating around the internet, but mostly I'm really flattered and honored.

(Also, yes, this is a really old question. I finally got a chance to go through my inbox!)

Hello! Sorry for the delayed response, I finally have the time to go through my inbox and answer some older questions.

I can't really answer regarding this specific scenario, because I don't know enough about the context of the story or characters.

Writing toxic relationships is basically the same as writing any other kind of relationship: it all depends on who the characters are, to themselves and to each other.

Sometimes people do horrible things to each other, and those actions and reactions all depend on the characters pasts and personalities.

Ask yourself who the father is, outside of his dynamic with his daughter or anyone else. Ask yourself, does he think he was somehow justified in what he did? Does he know it was wrong? Or does he lack the conscience to feel guilt for it? Does he love his daughter? Does he think he loves his wife? How does that play into what he did before?

The same with the daughter. Figure out who she is independent of the relationship, and it will help you determine how she'd react to learning about her father's actions.

Obviously, some world-building seems to play into this as well. I'm assuming what the father did is more acceptable in this fictional society, and that this allowed him to socially pressure the mother into entering a relationship with someone who essentially murdered her family. Consider how social norms will also inform the daughter's reaction.

These are just a few thoughts that I hope can still help you out.

Happy writing!

I have indeed seen Bumblebee, and it's great! It's actually my favorite Transformers media that I've seen, and it has a lot of warmth, heart, and character that was lacking in the other films.

A big part of that came from Charlie, the way she was written and performed, and her connection with Bumblebee. To me it really showed that it's the characters that make the media, not just a well-known name.

Hello there! Going to geek out for a bit and share some controversial opinions here.

I think all the flaws in Kylo's writing that you mentioned are 100% valid, though I will also say that I do personally find him to be a better written character than Rey. Why? Because there's an element of narrative tension to Kylo's character that Rey's character lacks.

This isn't a compliment to the writers. It's a byproduct of the fact that they themself didn't know what they were going to do with Kylo, and were waiting to see audience reactions to base their decisions around that.

This is true for a lot of elements of the Star Wars sequel trilogy (and the original trilogy to an extent to, though in lieu of the internet, it all felt a little bit more spontaneous and less...algorithmically generated).

But Rey was always going to stay good, and we, the audience, never doubted that or were given actual reason to suspend disbelief about it (like, yes, the odds of Luke following in Darth Vader's footsteps were also negligible, but the pull of the Dark Side felt way more real and tangible as Vader and Palpatine were tempting him).

I DO think Rey had a lot of potential as a character, and liked her in the first movie especially, but she was just increasingly blandly written. And a lot of that blandness came from a lack of narrative tension. There was no seduction from the Dark Side, no moment where we were really forced to question if we'd give into it in her position.

Now, Kylo had SO many narrative flaws, probably more than Rey. But at least we didn't know whether he was going to rejoin the Light Side, because the writers themselves didn't know. He could be REALLY villainous and unlikeable, but there was also a door left open for redemption - because the writers were waiting to see if that's what audiences wanted.

I can't speak for anyone else, but to me that's personally why Kylo ended up being a more interesting character than Rey, albeit not a particularly well-written one.

As to why he's never called a Mary Sue, obviously there's a big gender element to that - the term is almost exclusively applied to female characters, often by people who don't like women very much.

But I'm going to dip my toe into the waters of controversy here: a lot of producers, directors, and writers try and hide behind "strong" female characters to justify bad, shallow writing. A female character being "strong" won't make her interesting, likeable, or iconic.

Granted, people who don't like women will call ANY powerful female character a Mary Sue (or similar terms) but a well-written female character can usually attract enough adoration to drown those complaints out more.

Like, for example, The Bride from Kill Bill. Jackie Brown. Ellen Ripley from Alien. Katniss Everdeen from Hunger Games. Clarise Starling from Silence of the Lambs. Agent Scully from X Files. Elle Woods from Legally Blonde. Evelyn and Joy from Everything Everywhere All At Once. Princess Leia!

Yes, misogynists are going to hate, say, the most recent incarnation of She-Hulk (who's AMAZING in the comics, I'm so mad about it), but their hatred doesn't make her a well-written character by default. She's simply badly written in the show (in my opinion. Please don't kill me).

And I really, really want more iconic characters, male and female. That's why I demand better writing for both, and won't accept any cheap cop-outs.

Okay, this has turned into sort of a rant that doesn't have much to do with your original question. Forgive me.

Looping back to your original point, I do actually agree with all of your points about the flaws in Kylo's writing! And I hope you don't mind me using it as an opportunity to vent some of my Opinions.

P.S. Please don't jump me Star Wars people, the reason I'm opinionated about it is because I do really love it, especially the original trilogy (and more controversially, the prequel trilogy). Also, you guys make some beautiful fanworks, and really give a lot of these characters the depth and care that they deserve.